EXCHANGE 


EXCHANGE 
JUL    8    IP" 


THE 
UPRISING  OF  JUNE  20, 1792 


BY 

LAURA   B.  PFEIFFER 


Of  TH€ 


UNIVERSITY 


A   DISSERTATION 

PRESENTED  TO  THE  FACULTY  OF  THE  ACADEMIC  COLLEGE  OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  NEBRASKA,  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF 

THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 


LINCOLN,  NEB. 
1913 


THE 

UPRISING  OF  JUNE  20,  1792 


BY 

LAURA    B.   PFEIFFER 


A   DISSERTATION 

PRESENTED  TO  THE  FACULTY  OF  THE  ACADEMIC  COLLEGE  OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  NEBRASKA,  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF 

THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 


LINCOLN,  NEB. 
1913 


PRESS  OF 

THE  NEW  ERA  PRINTING  COMPANY 
LANCASTER,  PA. 


TO 

HER   TEACHER  AND   FRIEND 

FRED  MORROW  FLING,  PH.D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  EUROPEAN  HISTORY  IN  THE 
UNIVERSITY  OF   NEBRASKA 

TO  WHOSE  LARGE,  VARIED  AND  ACCURATE  LEARNING, 
MASTERLY  HISTORICAL  METHOD,  AND  DEVOTION  TO 
SCHOLARLY  IDEALS  SHE  IS  INDEBTED  FOR  THE  BEST 
IN  WHAT  SHE  HAS  WROUGHT,  THIS  WORK  IS  AFFEC- 
TIONATELY DEDICATED  BY 

THE  AUTHOR 


[Reprinted  from  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES,  Vol.  XII,  No.  3,  1913.] 


THE  UPRISING  OF  JUNE  20,    1792 

BY   LAURA    B.   PFEIFFER 

CONTENTS 

Chapter     I.     Introduction  199 

Chapter  II.     The  Decrees  of  the  Assembly 207 

Chapter  III.     The  Fall  of  the  Girondist  Ministry 215 

Chapter  IV.     The  Feuillant  Ministry 221 

Chapter   V.     The  2oth  of  June 226 

OUTLINE 

I.  Introduction   199 

A.  Struggle  between  the  king  and  French  people 200 

1.  The  calling  of  the  states-general 200 

2.  Struggle  between  "  divine  right "  and  sovereignty 

of  the  people 201 

a.  Oath  of  the  Tennis  Court 201 

b.  The  destruction  of  the  Bastille 202 

c.  The  4th  of  August  decrees 202 

d.  The  declaration  of  rights 202 

e.  Calling  of  the  regiment  of  Flanders 202 

/.  King's  intrigue  with  foreign  powers 203 

g.  Attempted  flight  of  the  king 203 

h.  Declaration  of  war  on  Austria 205 

i.  The  decrees  of  the  assembly 206 

;.  The  fall  of  the  Girondist  ministry 206 

k.  The  uprising  of  the  2oth  of  June 206 

II.  The  decrees  of  the  assembly 207 

A.  Led  to  a  clash  with  the  king 207 

B.  Needed  for  public  safety  208 

C.  Three  decrees  passed 209 

i.  Decree  against  the  priests 209 

197 


2  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

2.  Decree  dissolving  king's  guard 209 

3.  Decree  for  20,000  federes 212 

D.  The  king  vetoes  the  decrees 214 

i .  Popular  feeling  aroused 215 

III.  The  fall  of  the  Girondist  ministry 215 

A.  Ministry  urges  king  to  sanction  decrees 216 

B.  Roland's  letter  to  the  king 217 

1.  Insists  on  king's  sanction 218 

2.  Offends  the  king 218 

C.  The  ministry  dismissed 219 

i.  The  people  indignant 220 

a.  Demand  its  recall 220 

D.  Dumouriez  retained  in  the  ministry 220 

1.  King  still  refuses  sanction 220 

2.  Dumouriez  resigns   221 

IV.  The  Feuillant  ministry 221 

A.  Dominated  by  Lafayette 221 

B.  Lafayette's  letters 221 

1 .  To  the  assembly 221 

a.  A  threatening  tone 222 

b.  Arouses  indignation  of  France 222 

2.  To  the  king 223 

a.  Urges  him  to  maintain  veto 223 

C.  King's  veto  announced,  June  19 225 

1.  Great  indignation  in  Paris 225 

2.  Leads  to  the  uprising   225 

V.  The  2oth  of  June  226 

A.  The  plan  formed  234 

i.  The  meeting  with  Santerre 234 

a.  To  plant  a  liberty  tree 235 

b.  To  present  petition  to  king  and  assembly  . .  235 

B.  The  action  of  the  authorities 236 

1.  Council  refuses  permission  to  march 238 

2.  The  mayor  is  indifferent 239 

C.  The  night  of  June  19-20 240 

1.  The  department  decree  against  the  movement  . .  241 

2.  The  sections  sit  all  night 243 

3.  Mayor  forced  to  act  by  directory 246 

a.  Calls  municipality  for  morning 247 

D.  The  morning  of  June  20 247 

1.  The  directory  remains  firm 248 

2.  Mayor  acts  under  pressure 249 

a.  Commands  chiefs  not  to  assemble 249 

3.  The  faubourgs  assemble  251 

198     - 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  3 

4.  The  assembly  meets. — Noon 259 

a.  Roederer  reports  the  situation 260 

i'.  Urges  action  260 

5.  The  procession  is  at  the  door 264 

E.  The  procession 265 

1.  Outside  the  assembly  hall   267 

a.  Plants  liberty  tree 272 

b.  Municipal  officers  try  to  keep  order 273 

c.  Gate  of  garden  of  Tuileries  forced 274 

2.  The  petitioners  enter  the  hall 275 

a.  Saint-Huguin  reads  a  petition 275 

3.  The  citizens  march  through  the  hall 280 

4.  The  Carrousel  invaded 284 

a.  The  crowd  confused  but  peaceable 286 

5.  The  royal  gate  is  forced 289 

a.  The  crowd  enters  the  chateau 290 

6.  The  Tuileries  invaded 291 

a.  The  king  in  presence  of  the  people 295 

i'.  Puts  on  liberty  cap 297 

2'.  Tries  to  speak 297 

b.  Cries — "  Recall   the   ministers  ",   "  Sanction 

the  decrees "  299 

c.  Deputations  from  assembly  enter 301 

d.  The  mayor  intervenes 3°8 

i'.  Clears  the  apartments 313 

e.  The  queen's  apartment  invaded 316 

i'.  She  joins  the  king 316 

/.  The  crowd  passes  out 319 

i'.  The  chateau  is  silent 320 

F.  The  meeting  of  the  assembly  321 

i.  Reports  of  the  invasion 321 

VI.  Conclusion  324 


I 

INTRODUCTION 

Viewed  not  simply  as  an  incident  in  the  history  of  the  legisla- 
tive assembly  but  regarded  in  the  light  of  the  larger  movement  of 
the  revolution,  the  uprising  of  the  2Oth  of  June,  1792,  becomes 
one  of  the  turning  points  in  the  long  struggle  of  an  arbitrary 
monarch  against  the  attempt  of  the  French  people  to  establish  and 

199 


4  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

maintain  a  constitution.  The  struggle  began  with  the  opening 
of  the  States-General  in  1789,  and  ended  with  the  suspension  of 
the  king  on  August  10,  1792. 

During  the  early  part  of  this  struggle  the  French  people  looked 
upon  Louis  XVI  as  their  "bon  roi,"  in  sympathy  with  the  move- 
ment for  the  regeneration  of  France.  Although  at  first  attributing 
his  resistance  to  their  proposed  reforms,  and  his  delay  in  approv- 
ing them  to  the  influence  of  his  entourage,  they  gradually  became 
convinced  that  both  Louis  XVI  and  Marie  Antoinette  were  play- 
ing a  dishonest  part.  When  it  was  fully  recognized  that  the  king 
and  queen  were  unwilling  to  accept  the  constitution  in  good  faith 
their  overthrow  became  inevitable.1 

Whatever  the  idea  of  the  king  and  his  ministry  may  have  been 
in  calling  the  States-General,  there  was  a  firm  conviction  in  the 
minds  of  the  French  people  that  the  main  purpose  of  the  assembly 
was  to  be  the  reformation  of  the  government.  This  is  evident 
from  the  cahiers.2  A  study  of  these  documents  makes  clear  that 
all  classes — clergy,  nobility,  and  the  third  estate — were  insistent  in 
the  demand  for  a  constitution.  It  was  probably  not  the  intention 
of  the  government  that  the  people  should  interpret  the  letter  of 
convocation3  in  this  definite  way,  but  considered  in  the  light  of  the 
Resultat  du  conseil  of  December  27,  1788,  such  an  interpretation 
does  not  seem  to  lack  justification.4 

To  grasp  fully  the  significance  of  the  struggle,  it  must  be  under- 
stood that  the  third  estate,  representing  the  overwhelming  ma- 
jority of  the  French  people,  considered  themselves  instructed  by 
their  constituents  to  put  an  end  to  arbitrary  power  and  to  establish 
equality  before  the  law.  While  the  accomplishment  of  the  latter 
end  might  bring  them  into  conflict  with  the  clergy  and  the  nobility, 
there  seemed  to  be  no  sufficient  reason  why  they  should  not  receive 
the  support  of  the  king.  For  centuries  he  had  been  regarded  as 


'Fling,  "The  Oath  of  the  Tennis  Court,"  2,  3. 

2  Champion,  La  France  d'apres  les  cahiers  de  1789,  chap.  III. 

3  Brette,  Recueil  de  documents  relatifs  a  la  convocation  des  etats-gen- 
eraux  de  1789,  I,  64-66. 

*Moniteur,  Introduction,  509;  Aulard,  Etudes  et  lemons,  4  serie   (1893), 
4I-5L 

2OO 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  5 

the  adversary  of  the  privileged  orders  and  it  was  but  natural  that 
the  third  estate  should  look  to  him  for  leadership  in  this  crisis. 
Consequently  they  expected  on  his  part  at  least  a  policy  of  non- 
resistance  to  their  efforts. 

But  in  this  expectation  they  were  disappointed.  If  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  verification  of  credentials  at  the  opening  of  the 
States-General,  the  king  did  not  at  first  declare  himself  in  favor 
of  either  party,  it  was  possible  for  the  third  estate  to  interpret  his 
action  in  a  manner  favorable  to  their  cause.  But  when,  under  the 
stress  of  circumstances,  the  third  estate  declared  itself  national 
assembly,  the  king  abandoned  his  neutral  policy,  attempted  to 
undo  the  work  of  the  third  estate  and  threw  his  protection  over 
the  privileged  classes.  This  reactionary  policy  at  length  brought 
the  king  into  conflict  with  the  representatives  of  the  majority  of 
the  French  people.5 

That  the  struggle  was  one  for  supremacy  between  the  old  con- 
ception of  "divine  right"  and  the  new  conception  of  the  sover- 
eignty of  the  people  became  clear  on  the  2Oth  of  June,  1789. 
Under  pretext  of  preparing  the  hall  of  the  third  estate  for  the 
meeting  of  the  royal  session,  called  for  June  22,  the  doors  were 
closed  to  the  deputies  on  the  2Oth.  Moved  by  the  fear  that  the 
government  intended  to  dissolve  the  assembly,  the  commons  took 
the  famous  oath  of  the  tennis  court  in  which  they  proclaimed  that 
no  one  had  the  right  to  suspend  their  sessions.  The  resolution 
affirmed  that  nothing  could  prevent  the  assembly  "  from  continu- 
ing its  deliberations  in  whatsoever  place  it  might  establish  itself." 
"At  that  moment,  the  assembly  asserted  its  supremacy  over  the 
royal  authority,  virtually  declaring  itself  supreme  in  the  state."6 

Ignoring  this  declaration,  the  king  persisted  in  his  reactionary 
policy  and  on  June  23  held  the  royal  session.  Here  he  annulled 
the  previous  decrees  of  the  assembly  and  promised  a  series  of 
reforms  including  most  of  the  demands  of  the  cahiers,  but  he 
made  no  satisfactory  concessions  concerning  the  organization  and 
periodical  meetings  of  the  States-General,  thus  making  the  fulfil- 

5  Christophelsmeier,  "  The  First  Revolutionary  Step." 
8  Fling,  "  The  Oath  of  the  Tennis  Court,"  7,  8. 

201 


6  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

ment  of  his  promises  depend  upon  his  own  good  will.  Undis- 
mayed by  the  display  of  force  made  by  the  government,  the  com- 
mons disobeyed  the  king's  orders  to  separate,  persisted  in  their 
previous  decrees,  and  protected  their  members  by  a  declaration 
of  inviolability.  Being  impressed  by  the  sturdy  attitude  of  the 
commons  and  influenced  by  the  public  agitation  in  Paris  and  Ver- 
sailles, the  king,  unwilling  at  this  time  to  use  force,  brought  about 
the  union  of  the  three  orders  on  June  27. 

But  this  act  in  no  sense  marked  the  reconciliation  of  the  king 
with  the  new  order  of  things.  His  attitude  became  more  aggress- 
ive and  the  appeal  to  force,  not  made  on  the  23d  of  June,  was 
attempted  the  second  week  in  July,  when  the  uprising  of  Paris 
and  the  fall  of  the  Bastille  forced  the  king  to  withdraw  the  troops 
from  Paris  and  Versailles  and  to  recognize  the  supremacy  of  the 
assembly.7 

Having  failed  in  this  appeal  to  force,  the  resistance  to  the  new 
order  of  things  on  the  part  of  the  king  now  assumed  a  more  passive 
form.  The  new  policy  was  shown  in  his  attitude  toward  such  acts 
of  the  assembly  as  required  his  sanction  to  give  them  the  force  of 
law.  He  delayed  the  promulgation  of  the  4th  of  August  decrees, 
making  them  public  only  under  the  most  extreme  pressure  from 
the  assembly.  He  followed  the  same  policy  of  procrastination 
in  accepting  the  declaration  of  rights  and  the  articles  of  the  con- 
stitution, declining  to  approve  them  unless  the  executive  power 
were  left  absolutely  in  the  hands  of  the  monarch.8 

The  calling  of  the  regiment  of  Flanders  was  looked  upon  by  the 
people  of  Paris  as  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  king  to  maintain 
his  position  in  opposition  to  all  influence  that  might  be  brought  to 
bear  by  the  populace  of  Paris.  It  was  even  thought  that  the  regi- 
ment was  to  be  used  to  cover  his  flight,  if  that  became  necessary. 
The  banquet  of  the  bodyguard  at  Versailles  served  to  strengthen 
this  belief  and  led  to  the  uprising  of  October  5. 


T  Caron,  "La  tentative  de  centre-revolution  de  juin-juillet  1789,"  in 
Revue  d'histoire  moderne,  VIII,  5-34,  649-78;  Flammermont,  Le  14  juillet 
1789. 

'Stoddard,  "The  Causes  of  the  Insurrection  of  the  5th  and  6th  of 
October,"  23-25. 

202 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  7 

One  aim  at  least  of  this  movement  was  to  bring  the  king  to 
Paris  and  so  withdraw  him  from  the  influence  of  both  the  court 
party  and  the  moderates  in  the  assembly.9  This  plan  having  been 
successfully  carried  out,  again  it  was  believed  that  the  king's 
resistance  to  the  revolution  would  cease. 

But  his  change  of  residence  did  not  effect  a  change  of  the  king's 
purpose  and  his  resistance  only  sought  a  new  channel.  Neither 
open  force  nor  passive  resistance  had  been  able  to  prevent  the 
abolition  of  privilege,  the  promulgation  of  a  declaration  of  rights, 
nor  the  establishment  of  the  bases  of  a  constitution.  To  his  policy 
of  bad  faith,  to  which  he  still  adhered,  the  king  now  added  a  new 
policy  of  foreign  intervention.  "He  appealed  to  the  powers  of 
Europe  to  aid  him  in  his  attempt  to  render  futile  the  efforts  of  the 
French  people  to  establish  a  constitution.10  Marie  Antoinette  was 
in  constant  communication  with  the  Emperor  Leopold  and  was 
even  more  bitter  than  the  king  against  the  revolution.  She  had 
no  intention  of  abiding  by  the  constitution  and  it  was  understood 
that  her  influence  controlled  the  court.11  So  far  did  the  king  carry 
this  double-dealing  as  to  accept  publicly  the  constitution  which  he 
was  secretly  plotting  to  destroy.  In  the  speech  delivered  before 
the  assembly,  February  4,  1790,  he  proclaimed  his  attachment  to 
the  new  order  of  things,  promised  to  defend  and  maintain  the 
constitution,  and  to  train  the  dauphin  to  follow  in  his  footsteps  as 
a  constitutional  ruler.12  It  was  this  long  course  of  dissimulation 
and  international  intrigue,  entered  upon  both  by  Louis  and  his 
queen,  that  led  to  their  ruin.13 

The  attempted  flight  of  the  royal  family  June  21,  1791,  rendered 
certain  what  up  to  that  time  had  been  a  matter  of  suspicion.  The 
duplicity  of  the  king  was  laid  bare  before  the  eyes  of  all  France. 


9  Stoddard,   "  The   Causes  of  the  Insurrection  of  the  5th  and  6th  of 
October,"  38-47. 

10  Cambridge  Modern  History,  VIII,  215 ;  Flammermont,  Negotiations 
secretes,  5-9. 

11  Sorel,  UEurope  et  la  revolution  frangaise,  II,  436 ;  Clapham,  Causes 
of  the  War  of  1792,  Chap.  II,  also  90,  190. 

13  Moniteur,  III,  297. 

13  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  24-27. 

203 


8  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

It  was  made  clear  beyond  doubt  by  the  document  left  behind  him 
in  which  he  justified  his  acts  and  confessed  that  he  had  never 
accepted  the  revolution  in  good  faith.14  In  the  face  of  such  a  con- 
fession the  assembly  persisted  in  its  efforts  to  reconcile  the  king 
to  the  new  order  of  things.  Arrested  and  brought  back  to  Paris, 
he  was  suspended  from  power  and  placed  under  guard  until  the 
constitution  was  finished.  Then  set  at  liberty,  he  was  permitted 
to  accept  or  reject  the  constitution.  Again  he  perjured  himself. 
Having  publicly  accepted  the  new  constitution  he  at  once  entered 
into  secret  negotiations  with  the  king  of  Prussia  for  an  armed 
congress  of  the  powers  to  help  him  reestablish  a  more  desirable 
order  of  things  in  France.15 

There  followed  then  under  the  legislative  assembly,  a  period  of 
pretense  of  administering  the  government  under  the  new  constitu- 
tion during  which  time  the  king,  though  acting  within  constitu- 
tional limits,  was  wholly  out  of  sympathy  with  the  new  state  of 
things.16 

The  armed  congress  had  long  been  the  idea  of  Marie  Antoinette 
and  her  agents  at  Brussels  had  numerous  allies  in  the  French 
army.17  The  Emperor  Leopold  had  decided  as  early  as  January, 
1792,  upon  armed  intervention.18  This  attitude  of  Austria  aggra- 
vated the  situation.19  Its  presumptuous  interference  in  the  in- 

14  Glagau,  Die  fransosische  Legislative,  1-3 ;  Histoire  parlementaire,  X, 
269-74;  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  chap.  III. 

15  Moniteur,  IX,  152,  655;  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  chap.  V; 
Flammermont,  Negotiations  secretes,  9,  Louis  XVI  to  the  King  of  Prussia, 
Dec.  3,  1791;  Klinckowstrom,  Le  comte  de  Fersen  et  la  cour  de  France, 
II,  193,  Fersen  to  Gustavus  III,  March  4,  1792. 

18  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  chap.  VI. 

1T  Klinckowstrom,  Le  comte  de  Fersen  et  la  cour  de  France,  I,  233  ff. 
Letters  of  Marie  Antionette  to  Fersen,  October  and  November,  1791. 
Arneth,  Maria- Antoinette,  Joseph  II  und  Leopold  II,  259,  Mercy  to  Kaun- 
itz,  April  8,  1792. 

18  Flammermont,   Negotiations  secretes,   16,   Schulembourg  to   Breteuil, 
Feb.  13,  1792;  Vivenot,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte  der  deutschen  Kaiserpolitik 
Oesterreichs,  I,  327-70. 

19  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  chap.  VII ;  Roederer,  Chronique 
de  cinquante  jours,  4;  Arneth,  Maria- Antoinette,  Joseph  II  und  Leopold 
II,  253,  Mercy  to  Marie  Antoinette,  March,  1792. 

2O4 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  9 

ternal  affairs  of  France20  and  the  weak  policy  of  the  existing 
ministry,  led  the  assembly  to  force  a  Girondist  ministry  upon  the 
king,  March  12,  1792.  The  following  month,  April  20,  the  as- 
sembly, on  the  proposition  of  the  king  acting  on  the  advice  of  the 
new  ministry,  declared  war  against  Austria.21  The  responsibility 
of  this  war,  however,  can  not  be  charged  to  the  new  ministry  but 
to  Louis  XVI  and  Marie  Antoinette,  the  king  of  Prussia  and  the 
king  of  Hungary.22  The  king  gladly  accepted  the  situation  as  it 
offered  him  a  possible  means  of  cooperation  with  foreign  states 
and  would  thus  enable  him  to  realize  his  plan  of  dictating  to 
France  under  the  protection  of  foreign  armies.  He  continued 
his  secret  negotiations  with  Prussia  and  Austria  and  had  no  seri- 
ous intention  of  repelling  the  Prussian  invasion  while  Marie 
Antoinette  even  counted  the  days  that  must  pass  before  the  arrival 
of  the  enemy  in  Paris.-23 

The  situation  was  a  most  serious  one  for  France.  The  treason 
of  the  king  was  suspected  by  the  assembly  and  it  was  realized 
that  the  country  and  the  constitution  must  be  saved  in  spite  of 
him.  Vigorous  measures  were  necessary  and  the  Girondins  intro- 
duced them  into  the  assembly.  The  increasing  disorder  in  the 
provinces,  instigated  by  the  priests  who  had  not  taken  the  oath  to 
the  constitution,  led  to  the  passage  of  a  decree  against  the  non- 
juring  clergy,  May  27,  1792.  The  continued  suspicion  as  to  the 
king's  good  faith  in  the  defensive  operations  of  the  war  and  the 


29  Vivenot,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte  der  deutschen  Kaiserpolitik  Oester- 
reichs,  I,  433;  Klinckowstrom,  Le  comte  de  Fersen  et  la  cour  de  France, 
II,  226,  Dispatch  of  Caraman  to  Breteuil,  April  10,  1792. 

21  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  chap.  VIII,  IX. 

22  Flammermont,  Negotiations  secretes,  23,  28,  30;  Mellie,  Les  sections 
de  Paris  pendant  la  revolution  frangaise,  104. 

23  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  chap.  X ;  Aulard,  Histoire  polit- 
ique  de  la  revolution  jranqaise,  185 ;  Sorel,  L'Europe  et  la  revolution  fran- 
gaise,  II,  436;  Klinckowstrom,  Le  comte  de  Fersen  et  la  cour  de  France, 
II,  242,  Fersen  to  Marie  Antoinette,  April  24,  1792;  286,  Fersen  to  Marie 
Antoinette,  June  2,  1792;  298,  Fersen  to  Marie  Antoinette,  June  n,  1792; 
318,  Marie  Antoinette  to  Fersen,  July  6,  1792;  Arneth,  Marie  Antoinette, 
Joseph  II  und  Leopold  II,  266,  Mercy  to  the  Queen,  July  9,  1792;  Flam- 
mermont, Negotiations  secretes,  29-30,  Breteuil  to  Schulembourg  July  4, 
1792  and  July  14,  1792. 

205 


io  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

fear  of  his  body  guard,  which  was  hostile  to  the  assembly,  led  to 
the  decrees  for  the  dismissal  of  the  body  guard,  May  29,  1792, 
and  for  the  formation  of  the  camp  of  federes,  June  8.2*  The 
purpose  of  the  latter  decree  was  to  intimidate  the  king  and  to 
protect  the  assembly. 

While  the  king  hesitated  to  accept  these  decrees,  Roland  pre- 
sented him  a  letter  urging  him  to  sign  them.  The  king's  deter- 
mination to  veto  them  led  to  the  dismissal  of  the  Girondist 
ministry,  June  12. 25 

This  action  precipitated  a  crisis.  When  the  king  vetoed  the 
decree  against  the  clergy  and  that  providing  for  the  camp  of 
federes,  he  was  acting  within  his  constitutional  rights,  but  the 
assembly  believed  he  was  using  this  technical  right  to  deliver 
France  into  the  hands  of  her  enemies.  The  French  people,  then, 
must  either  submit  to  the  indignity  of  being  delivered  over  to 
Austria  and  Prussia  and  suffer  the  loss  of  constitutional  govern- 
ment, or  violate  the  very  constitution  that  they  had  created. 

The  uprising  of  June  20  was  the  last  peaceful  attempt  made  by 
the  people  of  Paris  to  incjuce  the  king  to  abandon  his  policy  of 
duplicity  and  to  govern  in  sympathy  with  the  revolution,  in 
accordance  with  the  wishes  of  the  assembly,  to  defend  France 
against  foreign  invasion  and  to  save  the  constitution.  They  hoped 
to  induce  him  to  withdraw  his  veto  and  recall  the  Girondist 
ministers,  but  the  plan  failed.26  The  people's  answer  was  the 
loth  of  August  and  the  suspension  of  the  king.27  Examined  thus 
in  its  connection  with  the  revolution  as  a  whole,  the  action  of  the 
people  of  Paris  on  June  20  becomes  intelligible  and  its  profound 
significance  stands  revealed. 


24  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  $ ;  Chaumette,  Memoires,  4. 

25  Madame  Roland,  Memoires,  I,  450;  Aulard  in  Revolution  fran^aise, 
XXXV,  525;  Chaumette,  Memoires,  5. 

28  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  212. 
27  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  7. 


206 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  n 

II 

THE  DECREES  OF  THE  ASSEMBLY 

In  the  spring  of  1792,  the  ministry  of  Louis  XVI  was  divided. 
The  minority,  supported  by  the  Feuillants,  led  by  the  Lameths 
and  by  the  minority  of  the  assembly,  were  opposed  to  war  with 
Austria  and  were  secretly  plotting  a  reconstruction  of  the  con- 
stitution in  the  interest  of  the  monarch  and  the  aristocracy.1  In 
this  work  they  counted  on  the  support  of  Austria.  The  Girond- 
ist majority  in  the  assembly  compelled  the  retirement  of  the 
ministry  representing  this  policy  and  on  March  12,  a  new  minis- 
try, in  sympathy  with  the  dominant  party  in  the  assembly,  was 
forced  upon  the  king.2  This  Girondist  ministry  stood  for  the 
vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war,  for  the  maintenance  of  consti- 
tutional government,  and  for  the  restoration  of  order  in  France.3 
It  was  not,  however,  a  harmonious  ministry,  Dumouriez  being 
the  disturbing  element.  He  was  at  variance  with  his  colleagues, 
selfishly  ambitious,  and  suspected  of  far-reaching  designs.* 

In  the  effort  to  carry  out  its  policy,  the  new  ministry  naturally 
found  itself  in  opposition  to  the  king  who  by  the  use  of  his  con- 
stitutional veto  was  endeavoring  to  control  the  situation  until  the 
allies  should  reach  Paris.  The  clash  came  as  the  result  of  the 
assembly's  decrees  concerning  the  clergy,  the  king's  guard  and 

1  Mercy  states  that  the  party  of  the  Lameths  and  Duport  wished  to  es- 
tablish two  chambers  similar  to  the  English  form  of  government  but  that 
the  queen  objected  to  this  arrangement.     She  engaged  him  to  present  her 
objections  to  the  Abbe  Louis  who  had  been  employed  by  the  Lameths  to 
influence  her  through  Mercy.     Glagau,  Die  franzosische  Legislative,  320, 
Mercy  to  Kaunitz,  Brussels,  May  30,   1792. 

2  The    members    of    this    ministry    were    Roland,    minister   of    interior, 
Servan,  minister  of  war,  Claviere,  minister  of  finance.     Duranthon,  La- 
coste  and  Dumouriez  were  the  other  members,  but  the  first  three  named 
were  regarded  as  representatives  of  the  Girondist  majority. 

3  Sorel,  L'Europe  et  la  revolution  frangaise,  II,   299-403 ;   Von   Sybel, 
History  of  the  French  Revolution,  I,  405-70. 

4  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  522 ;  Memoires  de  Madame  Roland,  I,  395  ff ; 
Oelsner  in  Revue  Historique,  LXXXIII,  308. 

207 


12  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

the  camp  of  20,000  federes  near  Paris,  all  of  which  were  looked 
upon  by  the  assembly  as  necessary  measures. 

The  decree  against  the  priests  was  considered  essential  to  the 
suppression  of  civil  war;  the  dissolution  of  the  king's  guard  was 
regarded  as  imperative  because  of  its  lack  of  loyalty  to  the 
assembly  and  its  well-known  devotion  to  the  king  who,  it  was 
feared,  might  use  it  for  his  own  ends ;  the  camp  of  20,000  federes 
was  decreed  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  assembly  and 
guarding  Paris.5  The  king  naturally  wanted  no  such  protection. 
Louis  permitted  the  dissolution  of  his  body  guard,  but  his  con- 
science forbade  him  to  sanction  the  decree  against  the  priests  and 
his  good  common  sense  led  him  to  veto  the  decree  for  the  camp.6 

The  action  of  the  assembly  had  to  a  large  extent  been  due  to 
the  pressure  of  public  sentiment.  There  was  great  agitation  in 
the  Jacobin  club  where  these  questions  were  freely  discussed  and 
criticized.7  The  populace  of  Paris  was  in  a  state  of  violent 
excitement  and  at  the  first  decisive  news  of  the  war  might  go  to 
any  extremity.8  Indignation  against  the  queen  was  very  pro- 
nounced and  the  pretext  for  an  attack  upon  her  was  found  in 
Brissot's  attempt  to  show  the  existence  of  an  "  Austrian  com- 
mittee "  of  which  she  was  said  to  be  the  head.9  The  court  party, 
frightened  at  the  sentiment  against  it,  strove  to  fix  upon  the 
Orleanist  party  the  responsibility  for  the  origin  of  the  report  of 
the  existence  of  a  so-called  "Austrian  committee."10  In  this 
state  of  affairs  there  was  nothing  for  the  assembly  to  do  but  to 
take  vigorous  action  for  the  restoration  of  order. 

8  Chaumette,  Memoires,  4;  L'indicateur  says  (XXXII,  June  20,  1792), 
in  regard  to  the  decree  for  an  armed  camp  that  it  was  a  legal  method  for 
bringing  armed  men  from  the  south  to  Paris,  thus  establishing  a  dic- 
tatorship of  the  departments.  The  Indicateur  was  hostile  to  the  Giron- 
dists. 

8  Sorel,  L'Europe  et  la  revolution  frangaise,  II,  479. 

TAulard,  La  societe  des  Jacobins,  III,  599-697;  IV,  2-23. 

8  Bacourt,  Correspondance  entre  le  comte  de  Mirabeau  et  le  comte  de 
La  Marck,  III,  305-08. 

9  Glagau,  Die  franzosische  Legislative,  321,  Pellenc  to  La  Marck,  end  of 
May,   1792;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  329;  L'indicateur,  XXXII,  June 
20,  1792. 

10  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  432,  467. 

208 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  13 

Looking  toward  this  end  the  assembly  had  passed  the  series  of 
decrees  already  mentioned,  the  first  of  which  was  directed  against 
the  priests  who  had  refused  the  oath  to  the  civil  constitution. 
Religious  disturbances  necessitated  some  decisive  action  against 
them  for  it  would  have  been  incompatible  with  the  preservation 
of  the  state  to  treat  longer  as  members  of  society  those  who  were 
evidently  seeking  to  dissolve  it.11  To  consent  to  the  project  of 
assembling  the  non-juring  priests  in  the  chief  places  of  the  depart- 
ments would  have  been  equal  to  creating  eighty-three  centers  of 
discord,  fanaticism,  and  counter-revolution.  The  country  must 
be  purged.  Such  was  the  feeling  of  the  majority  of  the 
assembly.12 

After  a  discussion  of  several  days,  the  assembly,  actuated  by 
the  fear  of  the  overthrow  of  the  constitution,  passed  the  follow- 
ing decree,  May  27,  1792  :13  "When  twenty  active  citizens  of  a 
canton  shall  demand  that  a  non-juring  priest  leave  the  realm,  the 
directory  of  the  department  must  pronounce  his  deportation,  if 
the  opinion  of  the  directory  conforms  to  the  petition.  If  the 
opinion  of  the  directory  does  not  conform  to  the  demand  of  the 
twenty  citizens,  it  shall  determine  through  committees  whether 
the  presence  of  the  priest  is  a  menace  to  public  peace,  and  if  the 
opinion  of  the  committee  conforms  to  the  demand  of  the  twenty 
petitioners,  the  deportation  shall  be  ordered."1*  This  decree 
placed  the  clergy  between  the  oath  and  deportation,  but  while 
they  trembled  at  the  assembly's  project  many  still  refused  to  take 
the  oath.15 

This  measure  was  followed  by  another  directed  against  the 
king's  bodyguard.  The  guard  had  allowed  anti-revolutionary 
sentiments  to  escape  it  and  had  uttered  menaces  against  the 

u  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  390 ;  Louis  Blanc,  Histoire  de  la  revolution 
frangaise,  VIII,  17;  Memoires  de  Madame  Roland,  I,  386;  Carro,  Santerre, 
106. 

12  Correspondance  de  Thomas  Lindet,  348-50;  Chaumette,  Memoires,  4. 

13  Morris,  Diary  and  Letters,  II,  535. 
"Moniteur,  XII,  483,  560. 

15  Revolution  de  Paris,  XII,  390;  Correspondance  de  Thomas  Lindet, 
347-53- 

209 


14  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

assembly.16  It  was  believed  to  be  royalist  in  its  sympathies  and 
wholly  devoted  to  the  person  of  the  king,  pervaded  with  the 
spirit  of  incivism  and  wholly  lacking  in  esprit  de  corps.  On  May 
28,  Bazire  proposed  its  dissolution,  charging  orgies  of  its  officers 
and  a  plan  for  carrying  away  the  king  and  asked  that  he  be 
allowed  to  give  his  proofs  the  following  day.17  Chabot  declared 
on  the  same  day  that  he  had  one  hundred  and  eighty-two  docu- 
ments which  proved  the  existence  of  a  plot  to  dissolve  the  assem- 
bly.18 Following  a  report  of  a  counterplot,  set  for  May  27,  the 
assembly  decreed  that  its  sessions  should  be  permanent,  that  the 
Paris  guard  should  be  doubled,  and  that  Petion  should  be  re- 
quired to  report  upon  the  state  of  the  capital  daily.19 

At  nine  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  May  29,  Petion  reported 
that  the  night  had  been  calm  and  nothing  announced  a  disturb- 
ance. He  had  scarcely  finished  his  report  when  with  a  great 
uproar,  a  crowd  from  the  section  of  the  Gobelins  demanded 
admission  to  the  hall.  Armed  with  pikes,  guns,  and  forks, 
dressed  in  sans-culottes  and  red  caps,  and  preceded  by  grena- 
diers, they  crossed  the  hall  with  drums  beating  and  ranged 
themselves  around  the  assembly,  swearing  to  sacrifice  themselves 
to  defend  it.20 

Bazire  thereupon  presented  his  report  for  the  dissolution  of 
the  king's  guard.  He  pointed  out  that  the  greatest  irregularities 
existed  in  its  organization,  that  a  large  number  of  its  members 
were  ineligible,  its  ranks  being  filled  with  youths,  priests,  men 
from  Coblentz,  and  some  former  Swiss  guards.  He  showed  that 
these  defenders  of  the  chateau  were  possessed  by  a  spirit  of 
counter-revolution  which  might  overturn  the  actual  regime.  He 
charged  orgies  of  officers  in  which  the  troopers  had  joined  in 
drinking  the  health  of  the  king,  the  queen  and  the  prince. 

10  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII,  305. 

"Moniteur,  XII,  508. 

™Moniteur,  XII,  513;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  418. 

19  Histoire  parlementaire,  XIV,  297  ff. 

"Moniteur,  XII,  508;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  378;  Lindet,  Corres- 
pondance,  IV.  The  assembly  held  an  uninterrupted  session  May  28,  29, 
30,  31,  indicating  the  critical  state  of  public  affairs. 

2IO 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  15 

Couthon  spoke  of  a  conspiracy  with  the  Ttiileries  at  its  head. 
Scenes  in  the  barracks  were  depicted  in  which  white  flags  had 
been  found  together  with  royalist  songs  and  pamphlets  attack- 
ing the  assembly.  White  cockades  had  been  distributed  among 
the  Swiss,  libels  on  representatives  of  the  people  had  been  myste- 
riously thrown  about,  and  the  cry,  "  To  the  devil  with  the  nation," 
was  heard  in  the  court  of  the  Tuileries.  The  most  extraordinary 
excitement  prevailed  in  the  assembly  and  this  was  increased  by 
the  insolence  of  the  royalist  members.21 

Public  suspicion  was  strong  against  the  king.  It  was  felt  that 
he  was  in  secret  correspondence  with  his  brothers,  that  he  was 
protecting  the  emigres  and  that  he  was  surrounded  by  enemies  of 
the  country.  To  dissolve  the  guard  might  baffle  a  plot  and  para- 
lyze the  work  of  the  "Austrian  committee."22 

The  arguments  were  finally  summed  up  by  Gaudet  who  stated 
three  reasons  why  the  guard  should  be  dissolved :  first,  it  was 
illegally  organized;  second,  its  chiefs  sought  to  inspire  revolt; 
third,  the  majority  favored  a  counter-revolution.  The  assembly 
decreed,  May  29,  1792,  that  the  guard  should  be  dissolved  and  its 
commandant,  the  Due  de  Brissac,  put  under  arrest.23  This  decree 
was  executed  at  once.24 

After  his  ministers  had  showed  him  the  danger  and  the  use- 
lessness  of  resistance,  Louis  XVI  signed  unwillingly  on  May  31, 
the  decree  against  his  guard.  He,  however,  assured  the  guard  of 
his  affection  for  them  and  his  satisfaction  at  their  service  and 


^Moniteur,  XII,  513-16;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  420;  Chaumette, 
Memoires,  5. 

22  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  382;  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII, 
306. 

^Moniteur,  XII,  526-29. 

21  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII,  306 ;  It  was  shown  that  an 
order  had  been  given  to  the  guard  by  Sombreuil,  governor  of  the  Hotel 
des  Invalides,  to  allow  all  men  who  presented  themselves  armed  from  the 
king's  guard  or  the  king's  household  to  enter  the  hotel  during  the  night. 
This  seemed  to  indicate  that  the  Hotel  des  Invalides  had  been  chosen  as 
a  meeting  place  for  all  malcontents.  Sombreuil,  summoned  before  the 
assembly  May  29,  admitted  the  charge,  but  explained  nothing.  Revolu- 
tions de  Paris,  XII,  382,  419,  420. 

211 


1 6  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

manifested  the  greatest  sympathy  for  the  Due  de  Brissac  when 
that  officer  took  leave  of  him  to  go  to  Orleans.25 

On  the  morning  of  May  30,  Petion  again  reported  the  situation 
in  Paris  as  tranquil.26  At  the  evening  session,  Louvet  asked  that 
all  the  sections  of  Paris  be  declared  permanent,  saying  "  It  is 
necessary  to  take  wise  precautions  that  we  may  not  one  day  be 
reduced  to  the  frightful  necessity  of  causing  the  blood  of  rebels 
to  flow  in  the  streets."27  On  May  31,  Petion  reported  that  tran- 
quility  was  perfectly  established  in  Paris  and  in  the  evening  the 
assembly  closed  its  permanent  session.28 

Such  was  the  situation  when  the  assembly  passed  its  third 
decree.  This  provided  for  a  camp  of  20,000  federes,  to  be  assem- 
bled on  June  14  near  Paris.  The  proposition  was  made  to  the 
assembly  June  4  by  Servan,  without  previous  consultation,  it  is 
said,  either  with  his  colleagues  or  with  the  king.29  Servan  urged 
in  his  proposition  that  the  act  was  necessary  to  establish  tran- 
quillity in  the  country.  The  decree  itself  states  that  its  purpose  is 
to  draw  more  closely  the  bonds  of  fraternity  between  the  depart- 
ments of  France.  The  discussions  in  the  assembly  showed  that 
the  object  of  that  body  was  to  insure  public  security.  The  allies 
were  approaching  from  without  and  enemies  of  the  constitution 
were  plotting  from  within.  Paris  and  the  assembly  must  have 
protection.30 

z*  Memoires  de  Ferrieres,  III,  76;  Memoires  de  Madame  Campan,  II, 
202,  204;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  430,  letter  of  D'Hervilly,  a  former 
commandant  of  the  king's  guard;  Chaumette  in  his  Memoires  (5)  states 
that  the  king  issued  a  proclamation  the  next  day  calumniating  the  assembly 
and  praising  the  zealous  partisans  in  the  guard,  but  Aulard  in  a  note  says 
he  was  not  able  to  find  this  proclamation. 

28  Moniteur,  XII,  531. 

27  Moniteur,  XII,  536';  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  421: 
™  Moniteur,  XII,  536;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  421,  424;  Journal  des 
debats  et  decrets,  No.  246,  p.  493. 

29  Moniteur,  XII,  570;  Memoires  de  Dumouriez,  II,  267;  Petion  in  an 
article  entitled,  Avis  a  mes  concitoyens,  published  in  Annales  patriotiques 
June  20,  1792,  says  that  although  he  and  Servan  were  closely  associated  at 
this  time,  Servan  had  not  communicated  his  project  to  him. 

30  Moniteur,  XII,  570-96;  Blanc-Gilli  (Lettre  d'un  depute  de  I'assemblee 

212 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  17 

Servan's  proposition  was  put  in  the  form  of  a  motion  by 
Merlin,  and  after  a  discussion  of  two  days  it  was  passed,  June  6.31 
It  provided  in  seven  articles  for  the  formation  of  a  camp  of 
20,000  federes,  recruited  from  all  France  in  the  ratio  of  five  men 
per  canton,  to  be  assembled  near  Paris,  July  14,  while  all  the 
troops  of  the  line  now  in  the  capital  should  immediately  be  sent 
to  the  frontiers.32 

On  June  7,  it  was  voted  that  the  twenty  thousand  should  be 
armed  and  equipped  by  the  nation.  Then  followed  a  discussion 
upon  the  manner  of  choosing  the  required  number  of  men,  should 
the  number  enrolled  exceed  that  allowed  for  each  canton.33  On 
June  8,  it  was  decided  by  article  seven  that  the  choice  should  be 
made  by  the  entire  number  enrolled,  in  the  presence  of  the 
municipality.34 

Servan's  decree  met  with  strong  opposition.  In  the  Jacobin 
club,  Robespierre  opposed  it  as  useless  and  dangerous.  He  asked 
why  the  army  was  to  be  brought  to  Paris  and  not  directed  to  the 
frontiers.  He  feared  the  enemies  of  equality  would  become 
masters  of  the  capital.  He  believed,  too,  that  article  seven  would 
become  a  source  of  trouble,  that  it  would  prove  ruinous  to  the 
Girondins.35  Dumouriez  violently  reproached  Servan  in  the  coun- 
cil meeting  for  not  having  presented  the  decree  to  the  council 


nationale  au  departetnent  des  Bouches-du-Rhone)  writing  to  his  constitu- 
ents, June  21,  1792,  asserted  that  Servan's  proposition  was  meant  to  stir 
up  the  people;  that  it  was  not  his  own  invention  but  was  suggested  to 
him  by  republican  conspirators;  that  only  on  this  supposition  could  one 
explain  the  letters  written  from  Paris  to  Toulon  and  Marseilles  early  in 
May  announcing  the  coming  federation  and  asking  the  people  to  prepare 
their  arms.  Then  he  added  that  all  this  indicated  a  plan  to  massacre  a 
number  of  functionaries  of  the  nation  and  the  royal  family. 

31  Moniteur,  XII,  571,  592. 

33 Ibid.,  XII,  607,  gives  the  final  wording  of  the  decree;  Mortimer-Ter- 
naux,  Histoire  de  la  Terreur,  I,  115;  Louis  Blanc,  Histoire  de  la  revolu- 
tion frangaise,  VIII,  26. 

33  Moniteur,  XII,  604. 

84  Ibid.,  XII,  607. 

35  Aulard,  La  societe  des  Jacobins,  III,  668. 

213 


1 8  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

first  and  but  for  the  presence  of  the  king  the  altercation  between 
these  two  ministers  might  have  led  to  blows.38 

Robespierre  and  Dumouriez  were  not  alone  in  their  opposition  to 
the  measure.  It  was  also  opposed  by  the  party  of  the  Feuillants.37 
Their  leaders  prepared  a  reactionary  petition  with  8,000  signa- 
tures, drawn  largely  from  the  members  of  the  national  guards. 
In  this  body  there  was  much  agitation  because  of  Servan's  speech, 
some  of  his  expressions  proving  offensive  to  the  Constitutionals. 
They  seemed  to  question  the  loyalty  of  the  national  guard.38 

On  the  8th  and  9th  of  June,  deputations  from  several  batallions 
complained  to  the  assembly  of  this  attack  and  presented  a  peti- 
tion, requesting  the  withdrawal  of  the  decree  and  protesting  their 
devotion  to  liberty  and  the  fatherland.39  For  several  sessions 
the  assembly  listened  to  accusations  from  partisans  of  the  peti- 
tion and  from  those  who  denounced  it.  The  Mountain  here 
deftly  changed  the  ground  of  attack  from  the  decree  to  the  peti- 
tion which  had  been  circulated  in  the  battalions  for  the  purpose 
of  extorting  signatures.  A  letter  asking  for  signatures,  sent  by 
the  staff  of  the  national  guard  to  each  battalion,  was  read  to  the 
assembly.40  It  was  charged  that  women  also  had  been  forced  to 
sign  the  petition  for  their  husbands.41  On  June  n,  a  number  of 
persons  appeared  before  the  assembly  to  withdraw  their  signa- 
tures and  among  them  an  officer  of  the  national  guard.42 

Finally,  on  June  10,  the  assembly  expelled  from  the  hall  as 
calumniators  all  petitioners  who  had  expressed  indignation  either 

™Memoires  de  Dumouriez,  II,  268,  269;  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique, 
LXXXIII,  308;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  480.  This  contemporary  news- 
paper claims  that  Dumouriez,  two  months  before,  advocated  just  such  a 
camp  to  save  Paris. 

87  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII,  308. 

88  Mortimer-Ternaux  points  out    (Histoire  de  la   terreur,  I,    115)    that 
the  Moniteur  does  not  give  Servan's  speech  in  full,  but  suppresses  the  ir- 
ritating phrases  which  were  criticised  in  the  petition  which  the  national 
guard  presented  to  the  assembly. 

39  Moniteur,  XII,  605,  618,  622;  Chaumette,  Memoires,  5. 

40  Moniteur,  XII,  618. 

41  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  482. 

"Ibid.,  XII,  509,  510;  Moniteur,  XII,  634-36,  638-40. 

214 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  19 

at  the  decree  of  the  assembly  or  at  the  insinuations  made  against 
the  national  guard  by  the  minister  of  war.  They  declared  by 
another  decree  that  the  assembly  could  not  listen  to  petitions 
which  were  the  result  of  criminal  intrigue.  The  Right,  indignant 
at  this  decision,  retired  from  the  hall  and  when  the  president 
accorded  the  petitioners  the  honors  of  the  session,  the  Left  by  a 
motion  of  adjournment  disposed  of  the  petitioners  and  of  the 
question  which  they  had  forced  upon  the  assembly.43 

Ill 
THE  FALL  OF  THE  GIRONDIST  MINISTRY 

By  the  middle  of  June,  the  feeling  of  unrest,  discontent,  and 
fear  had  become  general  and  pronounced.  There  was  danger,  it 
was  believed,  from  the  so-called  Austrian  faction,  the  Prussian 
army  was  approaching,  treason  existed  everywhere  and  grain 
was  getting  dearer.1 

Anarchy  actually  reigned.  Would  the  assembly  fill  Paris  with 
an  army  of  national  guards?  Partisans  and  adversaries  of  the 
camp  of  federes  were  continually  on  the  point  of  coming  to 
blows.  A  street  orator  came  into  the  garden  of  the  Tuileries  to 
read  a  libel,  preach  the  assassination  of  the  king  and  foretell  his 
overthrow.2  Marat,  although  he  had  been  condemned,  continued 

"Ternaux,  Histoire  de  la  terreur,  I,  116;  Moniteur,  XII,  635.  The 
Moniteur  here  states  that  the  Left  was  the  first  to  retire,  but  this  is 
apparently  a  misstatement,  as  it  was  the  Left  that  carried  the  measure 
against  the  petitioners. 

^indet,  Correspondence,  336;  Lescure,  Correspondance  secrete,  601-03, 
Lettre  20,  Paris,  16  juin,  1792;  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  3. 

2  June  12,  Delfaux,  a  member  of  the  Right,  denounced  to  the  assembly  a 
libel  that  an  orator  had  read  to  a  crowd  in  the  garden  of  the  Tuileries. 
Referring  to  Louis  XVI,  he  said :  "  But  this  monster  uses  his  power  and 
his  treasure  to  oppose  the  regeneration  of  the  French.  A  new  Charles 
IX,  he  wishes  to  bring  upon  France  desolation  and  death.  Go,  cruel  one, 
your  crimes  will  have  an  end.  Damiens  was  less  culpable  than  you.  He 
was  punished  with  more  horrible  tortures  for  having  wished  to  deliver 
France  from  a  monster.  And  you,  whose  attempt  is  twenty-five  million 
times  greater,  go  unpunished.  But  tremble,  tyrants,  there  is  a  Scaevola 
among  us."  Moniteur,  XII,  642. 

215 


2o  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

to  write  from  his  hiding  place  and  filled  his  journal  with  invec- 
tives and  threats  of  vengeance  against  those  whom  he  accused  of 
uniting  with  the  court.3  In  the  Jacobin  club,  there  were  heated 
discussions  upon  the  insolence  of  the  Austrians,  the  dissolution 
of  the  guard,  the  suspected  generals,  and  the  traitorous  priests.4 
In  the  council  there  were  stormy  scenes  between  Dumouriez  and 
the  three  Girondist  ministers,  Roland,  Servan,  and  Claviere.5 

The  public  was  impatiently  awaiting  the  sanction  of  the 
decrees  and  the  king's  delay  but  confirmed  the  suspicions  that 
were  abroad  concerning  his  bad  faith.  The  decree  against  the 
priests  had  been  in  his  hands  since  June  2  and  its  sanction  was 
awaited  even  more  impatiently  than  the  sanction  of  the  others.8 
The  restlessness  was  increased  by  an  event  of  June  3,  the  proces- 
sion of  the  Fete-dieu,  on  which  occasion  there  had  been  much 
disorder  caused  by  acts  of  violence  and  by  insults  addressed  to 
officers  by  priests.7  The  newspapers  by  their  reports  and  com- 
ments increased  this  unrest  and  the  people  of  the  faubourgs  were 
becoming  ever  more  irritated  and  threatened  an  uprising.8 

While  Paris  was  thus  full  of  disorders  and  scandals,  Dumou- 
riez urged  the  king  to  sanction  the  decrees,  assuring  him  that 
without  the  aid  of  force  he  could  not  hope  to  override  the  sus- 
picions of  the  greater  part  of  the  nation,  nor  the  rage  of  the 
Jacobins,  nor  the  politics  of  the  republican  party.9  But  the  king 
asked  for  time  to  reflect. 

This  state  of  affairs  could  not  last.     Someone  must  act.    The 


"Ternaux,  I,  118. 

4Aulard,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  III,  590-697;  Lescure,  Correspondance 
secrete,  601-03,  lettre  20. 

*  Memoir es  de  Dumouriez,  II,  269-71;  Memoires  de  Madame  Roland,  I, 
386. 

6  Moniteur,  XII,  560. 

7  Histoire  parlementaire,  XIV,  424,  contains  the  text  of  the  municipal 
decree  of   June    I    against  this   procession;    Revolutions   de  Paris,   XII, 
492-94,  gives  a  description  of  the  procession. 

8  Histoire  parlementaire,  XIV,  425,  gives  extracts  from  Brissot's  Patriote 
frangais,  June  4,  and  from  Le  tribune  des  patriotes,  No.  Ill,  of  Camilla 
Desmoulins. 

9  Memoires  de  Dumouriez,  II,  269-73;  Lescure,  Correspondance  secrete, 
lettre  20. 

216 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  21 

ministry  decided  to  force  the  hand  of  the  king  or  to  expose  his 
treachery  to  the  eyes  of  France.  Roland  took  the  initiative, 
making  the  delay  in  signing  the  decrees  the  occasion  of  a  letter 
to  the  king — a  letter  famous  in  the  history  of  the  revolution.  It 
has  been  aptly  termed  "the  ultimatum  of  the  Girondins  to  roy- 
alty."10 In  this  step  he  had  the  support  of  two  of  his  colleagues, 
Servan  and  Claviere.11  The  letter  was  dated  June  10  and  un- 
doubtedly reflected  the  state  of  feeling  of  the  majority  of  the 
French  people. 

Roland  stated  that  the  enthusiasm  for  the  constitution  was  so 
strong  that  the  people  were  ready  to  die  in  its  support;12  he 
assured  the  king  that  the  effect  o%f  his  attitude  would  be  to  en- 
courage his  enemies  and  arouse  defiance;13  he  showed  that  fer- 
mentation was  extreme  throughout  France  and  that  the  inflamed 
minds  might  be  aroused  to  commit  terrible  deeds;14  he  added, 
furthermore,  that  the  revolution  was  sure  to  be  accomplished  and 
that  the  king's  action  only  caused  suspicion  and  would  result  in 
the  overthrow  of  the  throne  ;15  and  concluded  with  the  assurance 


10  Ternaux,  I,  119. 

"Madame  Roland  states  (Memoires,  I,  387)  that  all  the  ministers  ap- 
proved the  idea  of  this  letter  to  the  king,  but  showed  weakness  when 
it  came  time  to  act.  There  is  no  other  evidence  to  show  that  Dumouriez, 
Duranthon  or  Lacoste  approved  it. 

13 "  Les  Frangais  se  sont  donne  une  constitution ;  elle  a  fait  des  mecon- 
tens  et  des  rebelles;  la  majorite  de  la  nation  la  veut  maintenir;  elle  a 
jure  de  la  defendre  au  prix  de  son  sang.  ...  La  declaration  des  droits  est 
devenue  un  evangile  politique ;  et  la  constitution  franchise,  une  religion 
pour  laquelle  le  peuple  est  pret  a  perir.  ...  La  revolution  est  faite  dans  les 
esprits:  elle  s'achevera  au  prix  du  sang  et  sera  cimentee  par  lui."  Mon- 
iteur,  XII,  658. 

13  "  Ces  sentiments,  qul  tiennent  a  la  nature  du  cceur  humain,  ont  du  entrer 
dans  le  calcul  des  ennemis  de  la  revolution.  Us  ont  done  compte  sur  une 
faveur  secrete,  jusqu'a  ce  que  les  circonstances  permissent  une  protection 
declaree.  Ces  dispositions  ne  pouvaient  echapper  a  la  nation  elle-meme, 
et  elles  ont  du  la  tenir  en  defiance."  Moniteur,  XII,  658. 

14 "  La  fermentation  est  extreme  dans  toutes  les  parties  de  Tempire ;  elle 
eclatera  d'une  maniere  terrible."  Moniteur,  XII,  658. 

15  "  Le  salut  de  1'etat  et  le  bonheur  de  Votre  Majeste  sont  intimement  lies ; 
aucune  puissance  n'est  capable  de  les  separer;  de  cruelles  angoisses  et  des 


22  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

that  the  remedy  for  the  situation  was  to  be  found  in  the  king's 
support  of  the  assembly  and  the  constitution  and  in  his  sanction 
of  the  decrees.16 

Just  how  this  letter  was  communicated  to  the  king  is  not  known. 
According  to  Dumouriez,  it  was  read  in  the  council  meeting  June 
10,  but  according  to  Madame  Roland  it  was  sent  to  the  king 
June  ii.  Dumouriez  accused  Roland  of  bad  faith  respecting 
this  letter,  asserting  that  he  promised  the  king  that  the  letter 
should  remain  a  secret  between  them  and  then  read  it  to  the 
council  and  sent  it  to  the  assembly.17  His  statement  is  not 
convincing. 

The  feeling  at  the  court  was  very  bitter.  The  king  was  indig- 
nant at  what  he  considered  an  insult.  On  the  following  morning 
Dumouriez,  who  was  now  at  the  height  of  royal  favor,  was  called 
to  the  chateau.18  He  found  the  king  and  queen  together.  The 

malheurs  certains  environneront  votre  trone,  s'il  n'est  appuye  par  vous- 
meme  sur  les  bases  de  la  constitution."  Ibid. 

1 "  Le  retard  de  leur  sanction  inspire  des  defiances :  s'il  est  prolonge,  il 
causera  des  mecontens.  .  .  .  que  votre  Majeste  lui  donne  sa  sanction!  la 
tranquillite  publique  la  reclame.  Pourquoi  faut-il  que  des  retards  lui  don- 
nent  1'air  du  regret,  lorsque  la  celerite  lui  gagnerait  tous  les  coeurs !  .  .  . 
deja  1'opinion  compromet  les  intentions  de  Votre  Majeste."  Ibid.;  "II  est 
evident  pour  la  nation  frangaise  que  sa  constitution  peut  marcher;  que  le 
gouvernment  aura  toute  la  force  qui  lui  est  necessaire,  du  moment  ou 
Votre  Majeste,  voulant  absolument  le  triomphe  de  cette  constitution, 
soutiendra  le  corps  legislatif  de  toute  la  puissance  de  1'execution,  otera  tout 
pretexte  aux  inquietudes  du  peuple,  et  tout  espoir  aux  mecontens."  Ibid.; 
See  the  letter  in  full,  Moniteur,  XII,  658.  This  letter  was  written  by 
Madame  Roland,  though  she  and  Roland  had  agreed  on  the  groundwork 
of  it.  Memoires  de  Madame  Roland,  I,  387,  Roederer  (Chronique  de 
cinquante  jours,  8)  refers  to  it  as  written  by  Roland,  but  he  wrote  thirty 
years  after  and  we  do  not  know  his  authority. 

17  Dumouriz  says  the  letter  began,  "  Sire,  cette  lettre-ci  restera  eternelle- 
ment  ensevelie  entre  vous  et  moi."     Neither  this  nor  any  similar  passage 
is  found  in  the  letter  as  published  in  the  Memoires  of  Madame  Roland 
nor  in  the  Moniteur.    It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  Roland  cut  out  from 
his  letter  the  expression  that  would  have  inconvenienced  him  or  whether 
Dumouriez    reported    what    would    have    aggravated    Roland's    mistakes. 
Memoires  de  Dumouriez,  II,  274.    Moniteur,  XII,  658. 

18  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII,  308. 

218 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  23 

queen,  he  tells  us,  broke  in  with,  "Do  you  think  that  the  king 
ought  to  endure  longer  the  menaces  and  insolence  of  Roland  and 
the  deceit  of  Servan  and  Claviere  ?"  Dumouriez  assured  her  that 
he  did  not  think  so  and  that  he  wondered  at  the  patience  of  the 
king.  He  advised  an  entire  change  of  ministers.  The  king 
thereupon  expressed  a  wish  that  Dumouriez,  Lacoste,  and  Duran- 
thon  remain.  Dumouriez  agreed  only  on  condition  that  the  king 
would  sanction  the  decrees  and  this  condition  he  asserts  the  king 
accepted.19 

The  fall  of  the  Girondist  ministry  followed  close  upon  the 
publication  of  the  letter.  Servan  was  dismissed  on  June  12,  and 
Roland  and  Claviere  on  the  following  day.  On  June  13,  these 
three  men  appeared  in  the  assembly.  A  letter  was  read  from 
Servan  announcing  his  dismissal  and  stating  the  reasons.  The 
assembly  voted,  amidst  great  applause,  that  he  carried  with  him 
the  esteem  and  regrets  of  the  nation  and  that  his  letter  should  be 
printed  and  copies  sent  to  the  eighty-three  departments.  There- 
upon a  letter  from  the  king  announcing  the  dismissal  of  the 
ministers  was  read  as  well  as  letters  from  Roland  and  Claviere 
announcing  their  dismissal.  The  climax  was  reached  with  the 
reading  of  Roland's  letter  to  the  king.  It  made  a  profound 
impression  upon  the  assembly,  being  interrupted  by  frequent 
applause  and  was  received  with  marked  approbation.  The  printing 
of  the  letter  was  decreed  and  it  was  voted  to  send  copies  to  the 
eighty-three  departments.  The  regrets  of  the  nation  were  voted 
to  Roland  and  after  some  objection  to  Claviere.20 

The  situation  now  grew  clearer.  This  letter  with  all  its  attend- 
ing circumstances,  followed  by  the  dismissal  of  the  ministry, 
made  it  plain  to  all  France  that  the  king  was  holding  firmly  to 
his  policy  of  determined  opposition  to  the  constitution.  The 
action  of  the  assembly  proved  just  as  clearly,  that  the  sympathy 

19Memoires  de  Dumouriez,  II,  275-79.  Royalist  writers  doubt  whether 
the  king  ever  agreed  to  sanction  the  decree  against  the  priests.  See  Ter- 
naux,  I,  120;  Morris,  Diary  and  Letters,  I,  544. 

20  M oniteur,  XII,  656-59;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  516;  Memoires  de 
Dumonriez,  II,  290-91;  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII,  310;  Les- 
cure,  Correspondance  secrete,  601-03,  lettre  20. 

219 


24  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

of  the  representatives  of  the  nation  was  with  the  dismissed 
ministry,  and  the  sending  of  Roland's  letter  to  the  eighty-three 
departments  was  nothing  else  than  an  appeal  to  the  nation.21 

The  names  of  the  men  who  were  to  replace  the  fallen  ministers 
were  announced  to  the  assembly  on  June  13  in  a  letter  from  the 
king.22  Dumouriez  was  leader  of  this  ministry.23 

On  the  same  day  that  the  dismissal  of  the  Girondist  ministry 
was  made  public,  Dumouriez,  as  minister  of  war,  read  a  memoire 
in  the  assembly,  upon  the  department  of  war,  in  which  he 
criticized  his  predecessors,  Degrave  and  Servan,  complained  of 
the  deplorable  state  of  the  army  and  reported  that  several  strong 
places  were  in  a  defenceless  condition.24  He  was  frequently 
interrupted  by  murmurs.  The  Left  at  once  accused  him  of 
treason  and  threatened  to  send  him  to  the  high  court  of  Orleans 
and  decreed  that  he  must  lay  before  the  assembly  within  twenty- 
four  hours,  documents  in  proof  of  his  assertions.  They  reasoned 
that  if  his  accusations  were  true,  he  was  a  criminal  for  having 
precipitated  the  country  into  war  at  such  a  time  and  if  they  were 
not  true  he  was  a  calumniator.25 

But  the  anger  of  the  assembly  was  mild  compared  with  that 
of  the  Jacobins  and  of  the  press.  Dumouriez  was  unsparingly  con- 
demned by  both.26  Fearing  an  uprising,  he  again  urged  the  king 
to  sanction  the  decrees,  but  Louis  continued  to  procrastinate, 
asking  for  a  little  more  time,  and  so  kept  Dumouriez  expecting 
his  sanction.27  Finally  the  king  refused  to  sign  and  Dumouriez, 

21  Lescure,  Correspondance  secrete,  601-603,  lettre  20. 
"Moniteur,  XII,  657;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  516;  Memories  de 
Dumouriez,  II,  280-81. 

23  The  other  members  of  the  new  ministry  were  Mourgues,  minister  of 
interior  and  M.  de  Neuillac  of  foreign  affairs.     Duranthon  and  Lacoste 
remained  and  the  ministry  of  finance  was  left  vacant.     King's  letter,  Mon- 
iteur,  XII,  657 ;  Chaumette,  Memoires,  6,  note  2 ;  Bacourt,  Correspondance 
entre  le  comte  de  Mirabeau  et  le  comte  de  La  Marck,  III,  311,  Montmorin 
to  La  Marck,  June  19,  1792. 

24  Moniteur,  XII,  669  gives  the  complete  memoire. 
"Ibid.,  XII,  660. 

^Aulard,  La  societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  2-3;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII, 
522,  ff. 
27  Memoires  de  Dumouriez,  II,  295. 

220 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  25 

realizing  that  it  was  useless  to  urge  him  further,  resigned,  three 
days  after  the  Girondins  had  fallen.  Much  to  his  surprise— for 
he  seems  to  have  believed  himself  indispensable — his  resignation 
was  accepted.28  His  was  a  short  and  an  inglorious  ministry. 

It  was  clear  now  that  the  king,  who  was  a  past-master  in 
deception,  had  used  Dumouriez  only  to  get  rid  of  Roland.  But 
even  this  injustice  brought  little  sympathy  or  regret  for  the  fallen 
minister  as  he  was  generally  regarded  as  an  adventurer  and  an 
intriguer  and  it  was  even  said  that  he  was  a  traitor.29 


IV 
THE   FEUILLANT    MINISTRY 

The  king,  in  a  last  effort  to  carry  out  his  anti-revolutionary 
policy,  chose  a  new  ministry,  the  third  in  as  many  months.  The 
letter  announcing  the  appointment  was  read  to  the  assembly  on 
June  1 8,  but  these  ministerial  changes  were  so  common  that  the 
assembly  paid  little  heed  to  it.  Of  the  old  ministry  Duranthon 
and  Lacoste  were  retained,  Chambonas  was  made  minister  of 
foreign  affairs,  Lajard  of  war,  Terrier  de  Montciel  of  the  inte- 
rior, and  Beaulieu  of  finance.  The  new  ministry  represented  the 
Feuillant  element  in  the  assembly  and  was  dominated  by 
Lafayette.1 

An  event  now  occurred  which  stirred  France  to  its  depths  and 
turned  all  eyes  toward  Lafayette.2  That  general  brought  himself 
effectually  before  the  public  by  writing  a  threatening  letter  to  the 
assembly,  dated  June  16,  1792,  from  his  camp  at  Maubeuge. 
The  letter  has  been  called  "the  manifesto  of  the  constitutional 
party  as  Roland's  letter  was  of  the  Jacobins."3  It  was  a  most 


28  Ibid.,  II,  295-300;  Morris,  Diary  and  Letters,  I,  544,  Morris  to  Jeffer- 
son, June  17,  1792. 

^Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIII,  310;  Lindet  Correspondence, 
356;  Chaumette,  Memoir es,  9. 

1  Chambonas  was  Lafayette's  cousin  and  Lajard  was  one  of  his  creatures. 
Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  522. 

2  Nouvelle  correspondance  politique,  XII,  i. 
3Ternaux,  I,  128. 

221 


26  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

undiplomatic  move  and  proved  to  be  disastrous  to  the  constitu- 
tional party.  In  this  letter  Lafayette  attacked  the  Jacobin  socie- 
ties, as  the  authors  of  all  disorders,  and  advised  their  suppression. 
He  represented  them  as  an  empire  having  its  metropolis  and  affil- 
iations, as  a  distinct  corporation  in  the  mi'dst  of  the  French  people 
of  which  it  usurped  the  powers  and  subjugated  the  representa- 
tives. He  denounced  the  ministry  just  fallen,  especially  Servan 
and  Dumouriez,  condemned  the  efforts  then  being  made  to  over- 
throw the  constitution  and  proclaimed  his  intention  to  enforce  that 
instrument  and  so  to  carry  out  the  supreme  will  of  the  people. 
Finally,  he  advised  the  assembly  to  suppress  all  foreign  and  in- 
ternal enemies,  asserting  that  France  was  able  to  protect  herself, 
if  she  would.4 

The  letter  was  read  in  the  assembly  June  18  and  was  received 
with  great  applause.  It  was  voted  that  it  be  printed  and  that 
copies  be  sent  to  the  eighty-three  departments.  This  entire  appro- 
bation seemed  to  show  that  the  assembly  was  Feuillant  in  its  sym- 
pathies. The  Left  was  greatly  excited.  Vergniaud  made  a  vigor- 
ous speech  in  which  he  distinguished  between  petitions  presented 
by  simple  citizens  and  those  presented  by  the  general  of  an  army, 
asserting  that  the  advice  of  a  general  to  a  legislative  assembly 
amounted  to  dictation.  Gaudet  insisted  that  the  letter  could  not 
have  been  written  by  Lafayette  because  it  spoke  of  an  event  which 
occurred  in  Paris  on  June  16,  and  which  could  not  have  been 
known  to  Lafayette  at  Maubeuge  on  the  same  day.5  The  letter, 
he  asserted,  must  have  been  fabricated  or  signed  in  blank.  He 

then  moved  that  it  be  sent  to  the  committee  of  twelve  and  the 

» 

motion  was  carried  unanimously  although  this  vote  was  entirely 
contradictory  to  the  former  vote  of  the  assembly  transmitting  the 
letter  to  the  departments.6 

This  letter  caused  the  greatest  excitement  in  Paris7  spreading, 


*Moniteur,   XII,    698;    Histoire   parlementaire,    XV,   69-74;    Roederer, 
Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  10;   Chaumette,  Memoires,  3,  8. 

6  This  event  was  the  dismissal  of  Dumouriez  as  minister  of  war. 
"Moniteur,  XII,  692-93. 

7  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  16 ;  Memoires  du  comte  de 
Paroy,  297;  Journal  d'une  bourgeoise,   130,  letter  to  her  husband,  June 

222 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  27 

of  course,  from  the  Jacobin  club  as  the  center  of  the  most  intense 
feeling.  The  death  struggle  had  begun  between  this  society  and 
Lafayette.8  He  was  denounced  in  their  meeting  of  June  18,  as 
being  in  league  with  the  enemies  of  the  country,  as  playing  the 
role  of  a  "  new  General  Monk,"  and  the  demand  was  made  that 
he  be  called  before  the  bar  of  the  assembly  to  answer  for  his 
acts  and  be  sent  to  the  high  court  of  Orleans.9 

But  the  feeling  against  Lafayette  grew  still  more  intense  when 
he  addressed  another  letter  to  the  king  in  which  he  surpassed  the 
dictatorial  character  displayed  in  the  letter  to  the  assembly.  He 
advised  the  king  to  persist  in  his  veto.  "  Maintain,  Sire,  the 
authority  which  the  national  will  has  delegated  to  you,"  are  his 
words.10  The  newspapers  accused  him  of  treason  and  the  assem- 
bly and  clubs  joined  in  the  outcry.11  A  keen  observer  of  his 
conduct  declared  that  he  must  be  either  a  rascal  or  an  imbecile.12 

Neither  did  Lafayette  pass  for  being  loyal  to  the  cause  of  the 
king.13  Early  in  May,  he  sent  an  agent  to  Mercy  at  Brussels  to 
ascertain  the  situation  in  governmental  affairs  and  to  learn  the 
king's  wishes  in  regard  to  the  constitution.  He  indicated  that  he 
and  Rochambeau  would  use  all  their  efforts  to  carry  out  the 
king's  desires,  saying  they  alone  possessed  the  means  of  establish- 
ing royal  authority.  But  Mercy  distrusted  him  and  ascribed  to 
him  one  of  three  motives:  (i)  embarrassment  attendant  on  the 


19,  1792;  Correspondence  entre  le  comte  de  Mirabeau  et  le  comte  de  La 
Marck,  III,  311-19,  Montmorin  to  La  Marck,  June  19,  1792. 

8  Glagau,  Die  franzosische  Legislative,  342-60,    Pellenc   to   La   Marck, 
Paris,  June  29,  1792;  Pellenc  to  La  Marck,  Paris,  June  30,  1792;  Pellenc 
to  La  Marck,  Paris,  July  13-15,  1792;  Clapham,  Causes  of  the   War  of 
1792,  212. 

9  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  537;  Aulard,  La  societe  des  Jacobins,  IV, 
10-16. 

10  See  the  letter  in  full  in  Histoire  parlementaire,  XV,  100,  and  in  Revo- 
lutions de  Paris,  XII,  535,  and  in  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours, 
10. 

11  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  535-37- 

12  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIV,  71 ;  Condorect  in  Chroniques 
de  Paris,  No.  172,  682;  Paroy,  Memoires,  297. 

13  Glagau,  Die  franzosische  Legislative,  341,  Abbe  Louis  to  Mercy,  June 
26,  1792. 

223 


28  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

disorganization  of  his  army  and  the  exhaustion  of  his  resources ; 
(2)  the  idea  of  escaping  surveillance  on  the  eve  of  a  premedi- 
tated attack;  or  (3)  a  project  of  arousing  distrust  at  the  court 
of  Berlin  and  of  making  dangerous  use  of  responses  which  might 
be  interpreted  as  overtures.14  This  distrust  existed  also  at  the 
Austrian  court.  Kaunitz,  writing  to  Mercy  concerning  Lafa- 
yette's propositions,  said  emphatically  that  such  a  man  did  not 
deserve  the  least  confidence.  He  advised  Mercy,  however,  to  use 
a  Fabian  policy  in  dealing  with  Lafayette  but  not  to  accept  a 
single  proposition  of  his  as  a  basis  for  reestablishing  order  in 
France.15  Later  correspondence  between  the  two  courts  shows 
that  this  distrust  was  not  dispelled.  Fear  was  expressed  that 
Lafayette  would  refuse  to  answer  at  the  bar  of  the  assembly  to 
which  he  had  been  summoned  and  would  find  in  the  devotion  of 
his  army  the  means  of  resistance  and  so  plunge  the  country  into 
civil  war.16  His  demand  at  the  bar  of  the  assembly  for  the  pun- 
ishment of  the  crimes  of  June  20  was  also  interpreted  as  an  ex- 
cuse for  bringing  on  civil  war.17 

Circumstantial  evidence  seems  to  point  to  an  understanding 
between  Lafayette  and  the  directory  of  the  department  of  Paris.18 
The  evidence  also  indicates  that  the  fall  of  the  Girondist  ministry, 
as  well  as  that  of  Dumouriez,  was  the  result  of  a  plot  between 
Lafayette  and  the  Feuillants.19 


14  Ibid.,  318,  Mercy  to  Kaunitz,  Brussels,  May   16,   1792. 

15  Vivenot,  Deutsche  Kaiserpolitik  Oesterreichs,  II,  58,  Kaunitz  to  Mercy, 
May  26,  1792. 

16  Glagau,  Die  franzosische  Legislative,  339,  Mercy  to  Kaunitz,  June  27, 
1792. 

17  Ibid.,  342-52,  Pellenc  to  La  Marck,  June  29,  1792 ;  Pellenc  to  La  Marck, 
June  30,  1792. 

"The  letter  was  sent  to  the  assembly  on  June  18,  by  a  servant  of  the 
president  of  the  directory.  Moreover,  the  aristocratic  newspapers  had 
the  contents  of  the  letter  on  the  morning  of  June  18.  Who  but  the  pres- 
ident of  the  directory  could  have  given  it  to  them?  Revolutions  de  Paris, 
XII,  532-33;  Histoire  parlementaire,  XV,  101-02;  Aulard,  La  societe  des 
Jacobins,  IV,  15;  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  67. 

19  Histoire  parlementaire,  XV,  74-78 ;  Roederer  relates  an  incident  which 
indicates  that  Lafayette  intrigued  for  the  fall  of  the  Girondist  ministers. 
He  had  been  sent  to  Lafayette's  camp  by  Servan  to  assure  that  general 

224 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  29 

The  official  announcement  of  the  king's  veto  was  made  on 
June  19.  A  letter  from  the  minister  of  justice  was  read  in  the 
assembly  stating  that  the  king  had  vetoed,  first  the  decree  of  May 
27,  regarding  the  deportation  of  priests ;  and  second,  that  of  June 
8,  regarding  the  increase  of  the  armed  force  by  20,000  federes 
to  be  assembled  near  Paris,  July  I4.20 

This  public  announcement  was  the  occasion  for  offensive  action. 
Discontent  was  general.21  The  storm  was  gathering.  A  civic 
banquet  held  on  the  Champs  Elysees,  June  19,  and  attended  by 
many  citizens  was  variously  interpreted.  Royalist  newspapers  re- 
ported it  as  an  orgy  attended  by  five  hundred  people  where 
anarchists  and  deputies  alike  took  part.  They  ascribed  to  it  an 
evil  purpose.22  More  moderate  writers  spoke  of  it  as  a  very 
proper  banquet  attended  by  many  good  citizens,  celebrating  the 
anniversary  of  the  decree  which  destroyed  the  titles  of  nobility. 
But  they  said  it  added  excitement  to  that  which  was  already 
aroused  by  the  publication  of  the  king's  veto.23  Everybody  un- 
derstood that  something  was  about  to  happen,  yet  feared  to  speak 
of  what  really  threatened.24  A  writer  of  the  time  said,  "  On  the 
whole,  sir,  we  stand  on  a  vast  volcano.  We  feel  'it  tremble,  we 
hear  it  roar,  but  how  and  when  and  where  it  will  burst,  and  who 
may  be  destroyed  by  its  eruptions,  it  is  beyond  the  ken  of  mortal 
foresight  to  discover."25  The  people  of  the  faubourgs  believed 

of  the  support  of  the  minister  of  war  and  of  his  desire  to  keep  in  touch 
with  him.  Lafayette  was  called  out  from  the  interview  by  a  messenger 
who  brought  him  the  news  of  the  dismissal  of  the  ministers.  On  hearing 
this  he  uttered  a  cry  of  joy.  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  9. 
™  Moniteur,  XII,  703. 

21  Chaumette,  Memoires,  8-13 ;  Lescure,  Correspondence  secrete,  601-03, 
lettre  20;   Gorsas,  Recit  generate    (Extrait  du  courrier  des  83  departe- 
ments). 

22  Correspondance  politique,  June  21,   1792,  LXIII,  2;  Nouvelle  corre- 
spondance  politique,  June  22,  1792,  XII,  2.     This  account  is  published  in 
pamphlet  form  under  title  of  Le  cri  de  douleur. 

23  Courrier  des  83  departetnents,  June  22,    1792,   IX.     This   account  is 
also  found  in  the  pamphlet,  Recit  generate  et  circonstancie  des  evenemens 
du  vingt  juin;  Le  mercure  universel,  June  22,  1792. 

21Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXIV,  71. 
25  Morris,  Diary  and  Letters,  I,  545. 

225 


3O  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

themselves  surrounded  by  plots  and  were  ready  to  take  the 
offensive.  There  was  a  growing  belief  in  the  king's  treachery 
and  the  Tuileries  were  no  longer  considered  inviolable.26  A  plan 
was  concerted  for  the  morrow  for  which  the  Girondins  were  not 
without  responsibility.27 


V 

THE  TWENTIETH  OF  JUNE 

There  have  been  various  explanations  of  the  uprising  of  the 
2Oth  of  June.  One  of  these  asserts  that  it  was  a  deep  laid  con- 
spiracy on  the  part  of  the  Girondist  leaders  to  reinstate  them- 
selves in  power  or  to  avenge  themselves  for  their  defeat.1  An- 
other* asserts  just  as  confidently  that  it  was  a  popular  demonstra- 
tion, an  instantaneous  response  of  the  masses  to  the  king's  refusal 
to  sanction  the  decrees  and  to  his  dismissal  of  the  three  ministers.2 
Still  a  third  explanation  regards  it  as  a  reply  to  the  letter  of  Lafa- 
yette, originating  with  the  people  or  with  the  Jacobins.3  Probably 
all  of  these  statements  contain  a  part  of  the  truth.  It  was  a  pop- 
ular demonstration  and  it  did  have  leadership,  but  no  plan  of  leaders, 
however  skillful,  could  have  succeeded  in  creating  such  general 
and  intense  feeling.  The  feeling  ^must  already  have  existed.  It 

28  Paroy,  Memoires,  297 ;  Journal  d'une  bourgeoise,  124,  June  16,  1792 ; 
Chronique  du  mois,  June  19,  1792;  Chaumette,  Memoires,  12;  Dreyfus  in 
Les  femmes  de  la  revolution  frangaise,  1789-1795,  says  the  people  saw 
that  the  intrigues  of  the  Tuileries  would  lead  to  the  power  of  the  Feuil- 
lants,  i.  e.,  the  constitutional  royalists  would  ally  with  royalists  of  the 
court. 

2T  Masson,  P elites  histoires,  serie  I,  246-58 ;  Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War 

Of   1792,   212. 

1Ternaux,  I,  129-230;  Louis  Blanc,  Histoire  de  la  revolution,  VIII,  53; 
Blanc-Gilli,  Lettre  d'un  depute  de  I'assemblee  nationale  au  departement  des 
Bouchese-du-Rhone,  Paris,  June  21,  1792. 

3Aulard  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XXXV,  532;  Lettre  de  Ph-Ch-Ai- 
Goupilleau,  depute  de  la  Vendee,  Paris,  June  20,  1792;  Correspondance 
secrete,  601-02,  Lettre  20;  Journal  d'une  bourgeoise,  130-33,  June  19,  1792. 

3  Patriot e  frangais,  No.  1046,  689,  June  21,  1792;  Clapham,  Causes  of 
the  War  of  1792,  212. 

226 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  31 

pervaded  all  Paris  and  had  grown  out  of  the  actual  condition  of 
affairs.  The  leaders  took  advantage  of  its  existence  and  turned 
it  to  account. 

The  greatest  demonstration  on  this  day  came  from  the  fau- 
bourgs and  the  reason  for  this  is  readily  seen.  The  sections  in 
the  center  of  Paris  were  dominated  by  the  royalist  faction  and 
had  not  the  spirit  for  organized  protest,  but  those  of  the  fau- 
bourgs Saint-Antoine  and  Saint-Marcel  had  conserved  all  their 
vigorous  sense  of  justice  and  of  their  rights  and  it  was  there  that 
the  great  questions  of  the  interests  of  the  country  and  the  means 
of  saving  it  were  discussed.4 

It  can  not,  however,  be  said  that  the  2Oth  of  June  was  solely 
the  work  of  the  sections  even  though  some  of  them  took  part  in  it. 
Ever  since  the  declaration  of  war  in  April,  the  sections,  under 
the  influence  of  the  double  danger  from  the  enemy  without  and 
the  court  within  had  considered  the  question  of  organized  resist- 
ance. Efforts  were  made  to  reestablish  their  state  of  permanence 
which  had  been  suppressed  by  the  law  of  May  21,  1790.  In  May 
and  June  seven  sections  demanded  from  the  legislative  assembly 
the  authorization  to  constitute  themselves  in  a  state  of  permanent 
surveillance.5  It  was  in  this  state  of  affairs  that  the  king  vetoed 
the  decree  against  the  priests  and  that  for  the  formation  of  the 
camp.  His  action  was  freely  discussed  in  the  sections.  The 
dismissal  of  the  Girondist  ministry  intensified  the  excitement.  A 
plan  had  already  been  formed  to  celebrate  the  anniversary  of  the 
oath  of  the  tennis  court  and  these  circumstances  gave  the  plan  a 
revolutionary  significance.  The  sections,  Quinze-Vingts,  Pop- 
incourt,  Gobelins  and  others  decided  to  go  around  to  present 
petitions  to  the  king  and  to  the  national  assembly  and  at  the  same 
time  to  plant  a  tree  of  liberty  upon  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants.6 


4  Chaumette,  Memoires,  12. 

5  Mellie,  Les  sections  de  Paris  pendant  la  revolution  frangaise,  104-05. 
The  names  of  these  sections  are:  Thea.tre-Franc.ais,  Croix  Rouge,  Fon- 
taine-de-Grenelle,  Lombards,  Luxembourg,  Meauconseil,  und  Louvre. 

6  Mellie,  Les  sections  de  Paris  pendant  la  revolution  frangaise,  104-05 ; 
Deliberations  of  the  section  Quinze-Vingts  of  June   19,  in  Journal  des 
debats  et  decrets,  No.  273,  p.  359. 

227 


32  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

The  rising  was  the  outcome  partly  of  the  veto,  the  change  of 
ministry  and  the  consequent  intrigues  of  the  Girondins ;  but  it  was 
primarily  a  plan  that  had  for  some  time  occupied  the  leaders  of 
the  faubourgs  Saint-Antoine  and  Saint-Marcel,  who  intended  to 
celebrate  the  anniversary  of  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court  by  a 
great  popular  demonstration  that  should  serve  as  a  warning  to 
the  king.  The  plan  was  to  present  a  petition  to  him  asking  for 
the  sanction  of  the  decrees  against  the  priests  and  for  the  forma- 
tion of  the  camp.7  They  wished  to  impress  the  king  by  the  aspect 
of  the  people  in  arms  and  so  frighten  him  into  sanctioning  the 
decrees  and  recalling  the  ministry.  But  there  was  no  attempt  on 
this  day  to  overturn  the  throne. 

For  perhaps  a  month  there  had  been  a  ferment  in  the  faubourg 
Saint-Antoine.  The  citizens  had  presented  a  petition  to  the  council 
of  the  commune  asking  permission  to  assemble  in  the  church, 
Enfants-Trouvees,  at  the  close  of  services  to  be  instructed  upon 
the  subject  of  "their  rights  and  their  duties."  The  municipality 
referred  this  petition  to  the  directory  of  the  department  and 
charged  Petion  with  presenting  it.  In  his  letter  to  Roederer,  June 
2,  Petion  recommended  that  the  directory  give  the  petition  a  favor- 
able and  prompt  consideration  on  the  ground  that  this  would  be 
a  means  of  teaching  the  citizens  patriotism  and  a  knowledge  of 
the  laws.8  By  the  middle  of  June  the  ferment  had  increased  and 
for  a  week  before  the  2Oth  we  can  see  it  not  only  in  the  faubourgs 
but  in  the  assembly,  in  the  clubs,  Jacobin  and  Cordelier,  and 
even  in  royal  circles.  The  newspapers  and  all  public  gatherings 
reflected  it.9 

The  subject  of  the  leadership  of  this  day  is  much  in  question. 

7Clapham,  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  212-13;  Chaumette,  Memoires, 
13;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  548;  Cairo,  Santerre,  107. 

8  Letter  of  Petion  to  Roederer,  June  2,  1792,  in  Ternaux,  I,  130. 

8  Declaration  de  Lareynie;  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  521;  Nouvelle 
correspondance  politique,  XII,  I;  Annales  patriotiques  et  litteraries  de  la 
France,  LII,  669-748;  Journal  royaliste,  No.  5,  1-2;  Correspondance 
politique  LXIII,  2;  Aulard,  La  societe  des  Jacobins,  III,  688-706,  IV, 
1-21}  Chaumette,  Memoires,  13;  Memoires  d'Alexandre,  Masson,  Petites 
histoires,  serie  I,  246-58;  Soltho  Douglas,  "Observations  du  19  et  20  juin, 
1792,"  Archives  Nationales,  W/b  251. 

228 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  33 

Many  assertions  have  been  made  regarding  it  for  which  no 
evidence  has  been  produced.  The  Jacobins  and  the  Girondins, 
collectively  and  individually,  have  been  charged  with  being  the 
instigators  of  the  movement  and  with  associating  their  party  cal- 
culations with  the  popular  excitement.  The  Jacobins  Danton, 
Robespierre,  Chabot  and  Lasource,  the  Girondins  Brissot,  Gaudet, 
Gensonne,  Claviere,  Roland  and  his  wife,  the  municipal  officers 
Petion  and  Manuel  and  the  editor  Gorsas  are  all  charged  by  one 
writer  or  another  with  being  the  leaders  who  remained  in  the 
shadow,  the  brains  that  directed  the  movement.10  If  these  men 
were  the  real  leaders,  they  remained' in  the  background,  for  there 
is  little  or  no  evidence  to  place  upon  them  responsibility  for  the 
uprising.  It  is  only  their  well-known  revolutionary  sentiments 
and  their  power  of  leadership  that  has  given  rise  to  suspicion. 

The  evidence  seems  to  indicate  that  the  leaders  of  the  Jacobins 
and  the  Girondins  had  in  mind  two  distinct  ideas  of  the  advan- 
tages which  might  be  gained  by  the  uprising.  The  Girondins  hoped 
to  effect  through  this  excitement  the  recall  of  their  fallen  ministry, 
while  the  Jacobins  did  not  wish  the  recall  of  the  Girondist  ministry. 

10Ternaux  says  (I,  131)  that  orders  were  given  out  by  Danton  and  by 
other  principal  leaders  who  remained  in  the  shadow;  Louis  Blanc,  (VIII, 
53),  calls  the  Girondins,  Roland,  Claviere,  Gensonne,  Gaudet,  Brissot  and 
Madame  Roland,  the  instigators;  Clapham,  (112),  charges  the  day  to  the 
Jacobins;  Robiquet,  (483),  calls  Danton  the  great  leader  who  gave  orders 
to  the  men  who  met  at  the  home  of  Santerre;  Martin,  (24-28),  indis- 
criminately rails  at  Petion,  Vergniaud,  Robespierre,  Chabot  and  the  Gir- 
ondins especially  Madame  Roland,  Brissot  and  Gaudet  for  responsibility 
in  this  uprising;  Varenne,  (19-20),  calls  Petion  chief  of  the  conspirators 
and  the  editor  Gorsas  an  instigator.  Masson  says,  Petites  histoires,  I, 
246-50,  Petion  was  an  accomplice  of  Alexandre  and  Santerre;  Lareynie 
says  Petion  was  at  the  home  of  Santerre  about  midnight  June  19  in  secret 
committee  but  this  is  hearsay  evidence.  Carro  makes  the  same  statement 
but  does  not  give  his  authority.  Documents  show  that  Petion  was  in  his 
office  from  about  nine  o'clock  till  about  two  in  the  morning,  as  we  shall 
see  later.  An  anonymous  pamphlet  of  the  time  also  accuses  Petion  of 
meeting  with  the  leaders  of  June  20  and  of  meeting  with  Orleans  at 
Rincy  the  morning  of  the  2Oth  but  the  records  show  that  he  was  in  a 
meeting  of  the  municipal  corps  all  morning,  Description  de  la  fete  civique. 
Royalist  newspapers  make  similar  statements,  Journal  royalist,  No.  4,  p.  3; 
Nouvelle  correspondance  politique,  XII,  i,  June  23,  1792. 

229 


34  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

They  desired  the  overthrow  of  the  monarchy  but  did  not  think  the 
time  ripe  for  such  action.  They  planned  to  await  the  arrival  of 
the  Marseillais,  when  a  thorough  revolution  could  be  accomplished. 

It  has  been  stated  that  the  leaders  of  the  Girondist  party, 
Roland,  Claviere,  Gensonne,  Gaudet  and  Brissot  met  at  the  home 
of  Madame  Roland  to  weave  a  plot ;  that  others  less  conspicuous 
took  upon  themselves  the  role  of  instigators,  and  that  the  watch- 
word was,  "  Recall  the  good  ministers."11  A  few  years  later  at 
the  trial  of  the  Girondins,  Chabot  testified  that  Brissot  and  his  ad- 
herents, wishing  to  rule  through  their  ministry,  formed  a  project 
for  intervention  by  the  people  of  the  faubourgs  for  the  recall 
of  the  dismissed  ministers  but  that  while  the  people  were  disposed 
to  take  part  in  such  a  movement,  the  recall  of  the  ministry  was 
the  last  thing  they  wished.12 

The  Jacobins,  Robespierre  and  Chabot  wanted  a  republic  and 
feared  that  the  recall  of  the  Girondist  ministry  would  only  make 
permanent  their  constitutional  chains.  According  to  Chabot, 
Robespierre,  convinced  of  the  intrigue  of  the  Girondins,  charged 
him  with  going  to  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine  on  the  evening  of 
the  iQth  to  persuade  the  people  to  content  themselves  with  a 
simple  petition  for  the  sanction  of  the  decrees,  and  to  await  the 
arrival  of  the  Marseillais  and  then  direct  their  movements  toward 
overturning  the  throne.13 

It  is  true  that  Chabot  was  in  the  faubourg  Saint  Antoine  on  the 


11 "  Notice  historique  sur  les  evenements  du  10  aout,  1792,  et  des  20 
et  21  juin  precedents,"  par  Sargent-Marceau,  Revue  retrospective,  2.  serie, 
III. 

12  Histoire  parlementaire,  XXX,  40,  "  Proces  des  Girondins." 

13  Ibid.,  40-41,  Testimony  of  Chabot.    If  Chabot' s  testimony  is  to  be  ac- 
cepted, Brissot  on  the  morning  of  the  2ist  admitted  that  he  was  one  of 
the  agitators  and  that  he  believed  the  movement  had  produced  the  desired 
effect  of  returning  Roland,  Claviere  and  Servan  to  the  ministry ;  that  when 
he  and  his  accomplices  saw  that  they  could  not  influence  the  court  they 
proposed  a  union  with  the  Jacobins  promising  to  effect  the  overthrow  of 
the  throne,  but  that  later  he  pronounced  against  the  Jacobins  ior  demand- 
ing this  measure.    This,  however,   is  the  evidence  of   a   man   who  was 
bitterly  partisan  against  Brissot  and  who  when  he  made  the  statement  was 
on  trial  for  his  life  and  was  trying  to  connect  Brissot  with  his  own  crime. 

230 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  35 

evening  of  June  19,  speaking  in  the  church  Enfants-Trouvees  from 
about  9:30  to  12:30  o'clock,  but  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  tried 
to  give  the  movement  a  revolutionary  character.14  He  made  an 
effort  to  have  a  decree  passed  in  the  section  Quinze-Vingts  to  the 
effect  that  they  should  present  their  petition  to  the  king  and  to 
the  assembly  unarmed.15  He  asserts  that  he  succeeded  but  that 
the  emissaries  of  the  faction  induced  the  people  to  arm  themselves 
after  he  left.18 

As  to  Robespierre,  his  plan  was  to  reserve  all  action  for  a 
decisive  blow.  He  spoke  much  at>the  Jacobins  to  this  effect.  On 
June  13  he  said,  speaking  of  saving  the  country,  that  "it  would 
not  be  done  by  partial  insurrections,  which  only  weaken  the  public 
cause."17  The  same  sentiment  was  expressed  by  Camille  Des- 
moulins,  who  said  in  the  Jacobin  club  on  June  19,  "  Without  doubt 
I  regard  insurrection  as  indispensable,  but  let  us  above  all  things 
guard  against  partial  insurrections."18 

Danton,  also,  has  been  accused  of  causing  this  uprising,  but 
there  is  no  proof  of  this  assertion.19  While  it  is  true  that  the 
debates  in  the  Jacobin  club  were  menacing  in  tone,  expressing 
feelings  out  of  which  the  2oth  of  June  might  have  grown,  and 
while  it  is  also  true  that  Danton,  Robespierre,  Camille  Desmoulins 
and  Lasource  spoke  vigorously — facts  which  may  have  given  rise 
to  statements  that  these  men  were  the  leaders — there  is  nothing 
in  their  speeches  that  can  directly  connect  them  with  instigating 
the  uprising.20  Danton,  on  June  13,  declared  that  he  would 


14  Ibid.,  40-41;  Nouvelle  correspondence  politique,  XII,  2,  June  22,  1792. 
This  article  is  reprinted  in  a  pamphlet  of  the  time,  Le  cri  de  douleur; 
Journal  royalist  No.  4,  June  22,  1792;  Correspondance  politique,  LXIII,  2. 

15 "  Proces-verbal  de  la  seance  du  19  juin  de  la  section  des  Quinze- 
Vingts  "  in  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  273,  p.  359 ;  Histoire  parle- 
mentaire,  XXX,  40. 

18 Ibid.,. XXX,  40-41. 

17  Aulard,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  III,  698. 

"Ibid.,  IV,  20. 

19Ternaux,  I,  313;  Robiquet,  Le  personnel  municipal  de  Paris,  482-83; 
Aulard,  Etudes  et  legons,  4.  serie,  192. 

*Ibid.,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  III,  688-706;  IV,  1-21. 

23I 


36  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

" engage  to  carry  terror  into  a  perverse  court"  but  on  the  I4th 
in  pronouncing  a  withering  discourse  upon  this  court  he  explained 
that  the  means  he  would  use  were  twofold ;  first,  to  levy  a  tax  on 
the  rich  and  second,  to  send  Marie  Antoinette  back  to  Austria.21 
On  June  18,  he  delivered  another  bitter  discourse  against  Lafayette 
demanding  that  he  be  called  to  account  before  the  'bar  of  the 
assembly  for  the  letter  he  had  written  to  it.22  But  none  of  these 
addresses  refer  in  any  way  to  the  uprising  of  June  20.  It  has  been 
more  justly  stated  that  he  kept  himself  apart  and  permitted  the 
uprising  and  did  not  regret  that  Louis  XVI  was  so  forcibly 
warned  by  the  people,  but  that  he  wished  to  avoid  bloodshed. 
His  dream  was  of  a  peaceful  revolution.23 

The  ostensible  leaders  of  the  uprising  were  of  a  different  type. 
Chief  among  them  were  Santerre  and  Alexandre,  commandants  of 
the  battalions  Enfants-Trouvees  and  Saint  Marcel,  men  of  con- 
siderable standing  and  influence  in  the  faubourgs.  Of  less  promi- 
nence were  the  marquis  Saint  Huruge  and  the  Pole  Lazowsky, 
captain  of  cannoneers  in  the  faubourg  Saint  Marcel.  There  were 
others  who  stirred  the  people  up,  such  as  Fournier,  known  as  the 
"American,"  an  elector  of  the  department  of  Paris  of  1791, 
Rotonde  the  Italian,  Legendre  the  butcher  from  the  faubourg 
Saint  German  and  one  Curiette  Verrieres.  Besides  these,  there 
were  a  small  number  of  confederates  of  the  faubourg  Saint- 
Antoine,  such  as  Rossignol,  the  future  general,  then  a  journeyman 
goldsmith,  Nicolas,  a  sapper  of  the  battalion  Enfants-Trouvees, 
Brierre,  a  wine  merchant,  Conor,  calling  himself  victor  of  the 
Bastille  and  others.24 

Alexandre  has  been  referred  to  as  the  man  who  played  the 
major  role  on  June  20  and  who  was  almost  master  of  Paris  in 


21  Ibid.,  Ill,  699-703. 

"Ibid.,  IV,  ii. 

23  Ibid.,  Etudes  et  lemons,  4.  serie,  192. 

1 "  Declaration  de  Lareynie."  This  declaration  was  received  among 
others  by  the  justice  of  the  peace  of  the  section  Roi  de  Sicile,  June  24, 
1792.  It  is  not  first-hand  evidence.  The  author  states  that  he  learned 
these  things  through  correspondence  and  information  from  the  faubourgs 
during  the  week  before  June  2Oth. 

232 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  37 

I792.-25  While  he  was  an  important  character  on  this  day  he  did 
not  play  as  important  a  role  as  did  the  wealthy  brewer  of  the 
faubourg  Saint  Antoine,  Antoine  Joseph  Santerre.  This  man  was 
king  in  the  faubourgs,  rough  in  his  manner  but  kindly  of  heart. 
By  royalist  writers  he  has  been  called  ignorant,  brutal,  debauched 
and  insolent.26  A  glimpse  of  his  life  will  serve  to  put  a  different 
interpretation  upon  him.  His  father,  also  a  brewer,  and  his 
mother  died  early,  leaving  a  large  family.  Antoine  Joseph  was 
thrown  upon  his  own  resources  at  eighteen  but  previous  to  this 
time  had  been  in  college  where  he  studied  especially  history, 
physics  and  chemistry.  At  twenty  he  bought  a  brewery.  He 
married  happily  but  lost  his  wife  before  the  close  of  the  year. 
He  married  again  but  domestic  unhappiness  drove  him  to  spend 
his  leisure  hours  among  the  people  of  the  faubourgs.  He  had  a 
reputation  for  kindness  to  his  servants,  generosity  to  the  poor, 
and  consideration  for  his  employees  and  so  became  very  popular 
in  the  faubourg.  He  took  part  in  the  storming  of  the  Bastille 
and  with  his  battalion  followed  Lafayette  on  the  5th  and  6th  of 
October.  He  often  displayed  great  courage  in  the  face  of  danger, 
several  times  facing  a  mob  to  save  a  man  from  hanging  or  a  woman 
from  violence  or  buildings  from  being  burned.  He  was  one  of  the 

^Masson,  P elites  histoires,  i.  serie,  246-58.  Alexandra's  business  had 
been  that  of  a  stock  broker.  He  gave  this  up,  entered  the  national  guards, 
took  some  instructions  and  was  elected  captain  of  cannoneers  of  the 
Gobelins,  then  chief  of  battalion  of  the  Gobelins,  finally  provisional  chief 
of  the  sixth  division  of  the  national  guard  of  Paris.  Alexandre's  own 
account  of  his  career  is  found  in  an  extract  from  his  Memoires;  the  man- 
uscript of  these  Memoires  is  in  the  possession  of  M.  Frederic  Masson  of 
Paris.  In  September,  1792,  Alexandre  was  allowed  an  indemnity  of 
12000  francs  for  valuable  services  rendered  before  and  after  the  loth 
of  August.  The  convention  made  him  minister  of  war,  June  22,  1792, 
for  one  day.  His  name  was  proposed  by  the  committee  of  public  safety 
but  the  idea  of  making  a  minister  of  war  of  a  stockbroker  was  so 
inconsistent  that  the  assembly  reconsidered  its  vote  next  day.  (Mon- 
iteur,  XVI,  892.)  Alexandre  was  named  commissioner  of  war  which 
office  he  held  for  eight  years  and  then  became  a  member  of  the  tribunate 
under  the  consulate.  Documents  in  support  of  this  are  found  in  Ter- 
naux  I,  394. 

20  Varenne,  Histoire  particuliere,  21. 

233 


38  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

guards  at  the  Tuileries  after  the  king's  flight  and  it  is  said  was 
recognized  by  the  king  and  queen  and  conversed  with  them  and 
even  received  overtures  from  the  queen  to  desert  the  popular 
cause.  He  was  compromised  in  the  affair  of  the  Champ  de  Mars 
as  'being  an  Orleanist  and  sought  safety  in  hiding  to  avoid  being 
arrested.  He  was  generous  of  heart,  giving  freely  of  his  money  to 
the  poor  and  distributing  free  beer  to  the  people.  He  was  daring 
in  the  execution  of  his  plans  but  not  cruel  nor  wicked.  Idolized 
by  the  people  he  could  lead  them  wherever  he  chose.27 

About  the  middle  of  June  the  leaders  of  the  faubourgs  began 
to  assemble  nightly,  sometimes  meeting  in  the  house  of  Santerre 
and  sometimes  in  the  hall  of  the  committee  of  the  section  Quinze- 
Vingts.  At  these  meetings  plans  were  drawn -up  for  the  uprising. 
Topics  were  selected  to  be  debated  in  popular  gatherings  at  the 
Tuileries,  at  the  Palais  Royal,  in  the  Place  de  Greve  and  at  the 
Porte  Saint-Antoine.  Incendiary  placards  were  prepared  to  be 
posted  up  in  the  faubourgs  and  petitions  were  formulated  to  be 
carried  by  deputations  to  the  patriotic  societies  of  Paris  and  the 
famous  petition  presented  to  the  assembly  on  the  2Oth  of  June 
was  framed.28  This  definite  work  seems  to  have  been  done  on 
June  IS.29 

On  June  16,  a  deputation  of  ten  citizens  representing  the 
petitioners  from  the  faubourgs  and  led  by  Lazowsky  was  sent  to 

27  Cairo,  Santerre,  1-99.  The  statements  found  here  are  drawn  from 
Carro's  Life  of  Santerre.  See  critical  bibliography  for  the  value  of 
this  material.  One  of  these  statements,  at  least,  is  borne  out  by  an  extract 
from  the  register  of  the  executive  council,  April  6,  1793,  showing  that 
Santerre  obtained  a  discharge  of  a  tax  of  49,603  livres  which  he  owed 
to  the  government  for  1789  and  1790  for  his  manufacture  of  beer.  The 
report  of  the  minister  of  finance  declared  that  this  beer  having  been  con- 
sumed chiefly  for  patriotic  ends  there  was  reason  for  remitting  this  tax. 
The  documents  are  found  in  Ternaux,  I,  389  ff.  It  is  also  shown  by  these 
documents  that  Santerre  had  asked  favors  of  Necker  and  Delessart  before 
June  20  and  of  Bonaparte  after  the  i8th  brumaire.  He  held  the  title  of 
Marechal  de  camp  and  later,  general  of  division  under  the  revolutionary 
government. 

28 "  Declaration  de  Lareynie,"  June  24,  1792. 

29  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  18. 

234 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  39 

the  municipality  at  the  Hotel  de  Ville  to  announce  "  to  the  council 
that  the  citizens  of  the  faubourgs  Saint- Antoine  and  Saint-Marcel 
had  resolved  to  present,  Wednesday,  the  2oth,  to  the  national 
assembly  and  to  the  king,  petitions  relative  to  the  circumstances 
and  to  plant  a  liberty  tree  upon  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants,  in 
memory  of  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court.  They  asked  that  the 
council  authorize  them  to  wear  the  uniforms  and  carry  the  arms 
that  they  used  in  i/Sp."30 

The  council  of  the  commune  on  the  motion  of  Borie  refused 
to  grant  this  request  and  passed  the  following  decree  the  same 
day:  "  The  council  having  deliberated  .  .  .  and  considering  that 
the  law  forbids  all  armed  assemblies  not  a  part  of  the  legally 
required  public  defense,  passes  to  the  order  of  the  day."  The 
council  ordered  this  decree  sent  to  the  directory  of  the  department 
and  to  the  department  of  police  and  that  it  should  be  communi- 
cated to  the  municipal  government.31  According  to  the  law  of 
June  27,  1790,  the  work  of  communicating  this  decree  to  the 
magistrates  was  the  duty  of  the  mayor.32 

According  to  Borie  the  delegates  when  they  received  this  answer 
were  defiant  and  stated  haughtily  that  nothing  could  prevent  them 

80 Extract  from  the  register  of  the  council  of  the  commune;  (Compte 
rendu,}  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire  de  Paris;"  "  Proces-verbal 
dresse  par  M.  Borie."  The  names  of  the  men  who  carried  the  request  to 
the  council  of  the  commune  are  Lazowsky,  captain  of  cannoneers  of  the 
battalion  Saint-Marcel,  Duclos,  Pavie,  Lebon,  Lachapelle,  Lejeune,  Vasson, 
citizens  of  the  section  Quinze-Vingts,  Geney,  Deliens  and  Bertrand,  citizens 
of  the  section  Gobelins.  Lazowsky  was  a  friend  of  the  Duke  of  Liancourt. 
He  had  been  factory  inspector  before  the  revolution.  He  was  also  an 
intimate  friend  and  sometime  travelling  companion  of  Arthur  Young. 
{Travels  in  France).  He  was  once  a  colleague  of  Roland,  later  a  friend 
and  member  of  the  Jacobins  by  whom  according  to  Madame  Roland 
(Memoires,  II,  193),  he  was  almost  canonized  when  he  died  in  March, 
1793,  though  his  death  was  a  result  of  debauchery.  He  was  buried  in  the 
Place  du  Carrousel.  Michaud,  Biographic  universelle,  XXIII,  441. 

31  See  the  decree  in  an  extract  from  the  register  of  the  council  of  the 
commune,  Compte  rendu,  4;  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Borie." 

"  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  departement  par  M.  Gamier,  Leveillard  et 
Demantort,"  240. 

235 


40  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

from  carrying  out  their  designs.33  The  fermentation  continued 
and  during  the  following  days  the  popular  movement  grew  to 
greater  proportions.  Alexandre  said  that  after  the  i5th  or  i6th 
one  could  easily  foresee  the  approaching  movement.  By  the  i8th 
and  iQth  people  talked  only  of  the  coming  event  and  the  excite- 
ment extended  even  to  the  Tuileries  and  vicinity.34 

In  the  face  of  such  an  uprising  as  now  threatened,  it  would 
be  expected  that  the  mayor  of  Paris  would  adopt  a  vigorous 
policy  to  suppress  any  disorder.  He  not  only  failed  to  meet  this 
expectation  but  the  evidence  seems  to  indicate  that  he  carefully 
avoided  knowing  anything  about  the  movement.  It  was  diffi- 
cult for  Petion  to  reconcile  his  personal  feelings  with  his  official 
duties,  but  he  evidently  felt  that  he  must  keep  up  an  appearance 
of  performing  his  duty  so  that  if  the  movement  failed  he  would 
not  lose  his  office.  He  was  known  for  his  attachment  to  the 
principles  of  liberty.35  That  his  sympathies  were  with  the  repub- 
lican doctrines,  we  divine  from  his  attitude  toward  the  faubourg 
Saint-Antoine  when  it  asked  permission  on  June  2  to  form  a  club 
which  should  meet  in  the  church  Enfants-Trouvees  at  the  close 
of  services  "  for  the  purpose  of  being  instructed  in  their  rights 
and  their  duties."36 

He  was  evidently  absent  from  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  June  16, 
when  the  deputation  from  the  faubourgs  presented  their  peti- 
tion and  so  did  not  receive  the  decree  of  the  council  until  June  18. 
On  that  day  two  copies  were  addressed  to  him  by  the  secretary 


1  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Borie";  Ternaux,  (I,  318)  makes  this 
statement  on  a  declaration  of  J.  J.  Leroux,  but  the  statement  is  not  found 
in  his  declaration. 

"Masson,  Petites  histoires,  I.  serie,  246-58;  Extract  from  Alexandre's 
Memoires;  "  Rapport  que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers  "  ;  Journal  d'une  bour- 
geoise,  310,  letter  to  her  husband,  June  19,  1792;  "Rapport  de  police," 
Soltho  Douglas,  "  Observations  du  19  et  20  juin,  1792,"  Archives  Nationales 
W/b  251  ;  letter  of  Terrier  to  the  directory,  June  19,  1792  in  Rapport  du 
ministre  de  I'inteneur,  i. 

85  Memoires  d'  Alexandre"  in  Masson,  ~P  elites  histoires,  i.  serie,  246-58; 
Journal  d'une  bourgeoise,  130,  Letter  to  her  husband,  June  19,  1792.     She 
says  Petion  was  between  Scylla  and  Charybdis. 

86  Letter  of  Petion  to  Roederer,  June  2,  1792,  referred  to  above. 


236 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  41 

of  the  council  together  with  a  letter  reminding  the  mayor  of  the 
provisions  of  the  decree  for  its  communication.  A  third  copy 
was  addressed  by  the  secretary  to  the  department  of  police.37 
Petion  seems  to  have  been  absent  from  his  office  when  this  letter 
reached  it  on  June  18.  His  chief  secretary,  because  of  the 
urgency  of  the  case,  sent  an  unsigned  letter  to  Roederer  enclosing 
a  copy  of  the  decree,  adding  that  the  same  letter,  officially  signed, 
would  be  sent  him  tomorrow.38  Later,  on  the  same  day,  Petion 
sent  a  letter  to  Roederer  informing  him  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
commune  on  the  i6th,  enclosing  a  copy  of  the  decree  and  asking 
him  to  communicate  it  to  the  directory.39  But  he  gave  no  orders 
for  the  suppression  of  the  movement. 

Later,  when  the  mayor  was  accused  of  failing  in  the  discharge 
of  his  duties  on  this  occasion,  he  justified  his  inaction  by  saying 
that  this  request  of  the  i6th  was  one  of  individuals  who  desired 
to  march  without  being  assembled  under  the  flag  of  the  military 
force  or  without  being  directed  by  the  officers  recognized  by  law.40 
Plainly  the  mayor  of  Paris  was  not  disposed  to  make  any  effort 
to  allay  the  fermentation. 

The  directory,  although  it  had  no  legal  right  to  act  directly  in 
this  case,  was  much  concerned  for  the  public  peace.  It  spared 
no  efforts  to  maintain  the  peace  and  by  means  of  letters,  decrees 
and  conferences  tried  to  force  the  mayor  and  the  municipal 
officers  to  repress  the  uprising.41  After  having  received  a  com- 


37  See  the  letter  from  the  secretary  of  the  council  of  the  commune  to 
Petion,  (Ternaux,  I,  139),  enclosing  copies  of  the  decree. 

^Letter  from  Petion' s  office  to  Roederer,  June  18,  1792,  in  Revue  retro- 
spective, 2  serie,  I,  162-63. 

39  Letter  of  Petion  to  Roederer,  June  18,  1792,  in  Proclamation  du  roi  et 
recueil  de  pieces,  No.  I. 

40 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  Maire." 

41  The  administrators  composing  the  directory  of  the  department  of 
Paris  were  La  Rochefoucauld,  president,  Anson,  vice  president,  Gamier 
(Germain),  substitute  for  the  procureur,  Davous,  Talleyrand,  Brousse  des 
Faucherets,  Trion  de  Chaume,  Demeunier,  and  Briois.  Of  this  organiza- 
tion, Blondel  was  secretary  and  Roederer,  prosecuting  attorney.  It  was 
an  essentially  aristocratic  body.  The  list  of  names  of  all  the  members  of 
the  department  is  found  in  Lacroix,  Le  dcpartement  de  Paris  et  de  la 
Seine  pendant  la  revolution,  212. 

237 


42  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

munication  from  Roederer,  it  wrote  to  the  mayor  and  to  the 
municipality,  at  noon  on  June  19,  reminding  them  of  their  duty 
and  asking  them  to  meet  with  the  directory  between  two  and 
three  o'clock.42  It  wrote  another  letter  to  Petion  suggesting  that 
he  issue  a  proclamation  stating  the  laws  relative  to  public  peace, 
calling  attention  to  the  former  decree  of  the  municipality  regard- 
ing armed  defense  and  requested  that  he  ask  the  citizens  to  main- 
tain order.43  Between  two  and  three  o'clock  the  mayor  and  the 
police  attended  the  meeting  of  the  directory.  The  session  was 
evidently  a  stormy  one,  for  the  situation  was  freely  discussed.44 
At  this  meeting  the  directory,  in  the  presence  of  Petion,  passed 
a  decree  declaring  that  it  had  learned  from  several  sources  that 
notwithstanding  the  decree  of  the  council  of  the  commune,  evil- 
minded  persons  still  intended  to  form  armed  assemblies  under 
pretext  of  presenting  petitions  ;  that  they  thought  that  the  public 
should  be  reminded  of  the  law  which  forebade  an  assemblage  of 
armed  citizens  and  of  the  municipal  law  which  authorized  the 
sending  of  a  deputation  of  twenty  citizens  to  present  petitions; 
that  the  people  ought  not  to  insult  the  council  which  had  refused 
the  request  of  the  faubourgs  on  the  i6th  by  allowing  an  armed 
gathering  nor  offend  the  majesty  of  the  representatives  of  the 
people  by  presenting  themselves  before  them  armed.  The  direct- 
ory then  decreed  that  the  mayor,  the  municipality  and  the  com- 
mandant should  be  warned  without  delay  to  take  all  possible 
measures  to  prevent  armed  assemblies  that  would  violate  law  and 
use  all  the  force  at  their  disposal  to  prevent  disturbance  of  the 
public  peace,  and  for  citizens,  national  guards  and  all  composing 
the  armed  force  to  hold  themselves  ready  to  assist  if  necessary.45 
Pursuant  to  this  decree,  Petion  immediately  dispatched  orders 
to  the  commandant  and  to  the  administrators  of  police  to  execute 
the  decree.46  He  instructed  the  commandant  to  keep  the  posts 


1  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 
43  This  letter  is  found  in  Ternaux,  I,  140,  note  2. 
""Conduite   tenue   par   M.   le  maire." 
45  Decree  of  the  directory,  June  19,  1792. 


49  Roederer,    Chronique   de   cinquante   jours,    19,    says   that   the   mayor 
wrote  these  letters  at  the  desk  of  the  directory;  "Rapport  fait  au  conseil 

238 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  43 

filled,  to  double  the  guards  at  the  Tuileries  and  at  the  national 
assembly,  to  have  at  his  disposal  reserves  of  infantry  and  cavalry 
and  to  take  every  measure  to  maintain  order.47  He  also  wrote  to 
the  commissioners  of  police  instructing  them  to  keep  the  peace.48 
He  then  summoned  the  commandants  of  the  two  faubourgs  to 
come  to  the  mayoralty  at  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening.49  It  also 
appears  that  some  time  before  the  evening  of  the  iQth  he  had 
written  a  letter  to  the  president  of  the  section  Quinze-Vingts, 
asking  that  the  citizens  do  not  go  armed  to  the  assembly  nor  to 
the  king.50 

Meantime  the  minister  of  the  interior,  Terrier  de  Montciel,51 
had  heard  alarming  reports  concerning  the  tranquillity  of  Paris 
and  wrote  to  the  directory  at  2  :3O  o'clock  asking  to  be  kept  in- 
formed of  the  situation  so  that  he  might  at  once  render  an  account 
to  the  king.52  The  directory  received  this  letter  of  inquiry  while 
it  was  deliberating  and  responded  at  once  with  a  copy  of  its  de- 
cree and  asked  Terrier  to  communicate  it  to  the  national  assem- 
bly.53 Ever  since  the  letter  of  Lafayette  to  the  assembly  had 


du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier,  Leveillard  et  Demantort,"  Revue  ret- 
rospective, 2.  serie,  I,  241. 

47 "  Rapport  que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers " ;  "  Rapport  de  Roederer," 
Histoire  parlementaire,  XV,  424.  Ternaux  states  (I,  141,  note)  that  he  has 
found  the  minutes  of  this  letter  and  that  it  adds  at  the  end  the  mayor's 
authorization  to  make  requisition  for  regular  troops  if  they  are  needed 
by  the  commandant. 

48  Letter  of  Petion  to  Dumont,  commissioner  of  police,  Section  Mon- 
treuil,  June  19,  1792 ;  "  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  department  par  MM. 
Gamier,  Leveillard  et  Demantort " ;  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

49 "  Rapport  d'Alexandre,"  Ternaux,  I,  407 ;  "  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  de 
department  par  MM.  Garnier,  Leveillard  et  Demantort " ;  "  Conduite  tenue 
par  M.  le  maire." 

50  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  273,  p.  360.    This  gives,  in  the  report 
of  the  proceedings  of  the  assembly  for  June  25,  a  proces-verbal  of  the 
section  Quinze-Vingts  for  June  19,  evening  session. 

51  Terrier  unlike  Petion  was  out  of  sympathy  with  republican  doctrines. 
He  belonged  to  the  party  of  Lameth  and  Duport.     Glagau,  339,  Mercy  to 
Kaunitz,  June  27,  1792. 

52  Rapport  du  ministre  de  I'interieur,  I,  letter  of  Terrier  to  the  direc- 
tory, June  19,  1792,  2:30  o'clock. 

53  Ibid.,  Letter  of  the  directory  to  Terrier,  June  19,  1792. 

239 


44  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

been  made  public,  there  had  been  a  feeling  of  unrest  and  fear  at 
the  Tuileries  which  had  grown  with  each  new  report  and  now 
bordered  on  terror.  The  king  had  made  his  will,  had  gone  to  con- 
fession and  it  was  said  that  the  members  of  the  royal  family  had 
given  gifts  as  last  souvenirs  to  their  personal  friends.  It  was 
also  reported  that  a  week  before,  the  king  had  said,  "  I  know  the 
dark  projects  they  have  against  me;  I  shall  be  at  Saint-Denis 
within  a  fortnight  providing  that  they  will  allow  my  body  to  lie 
beside  those  of  my  ancestors."54  It  was  furthermore  believed 
that  the  king  was  preparing  to  leave  Paris.  On  June  18,  Petion 
received  a  letter  from  Bayonne,  without  signature  and  without 
date,  that  informed  him  that  the  king  was  going  to  leave  Paris 
at  two  o'clock  in  the  morning.  Petion  summoned  the  command- 
ant to  suspend  all  other  business  and  come  to  him  without  delay 
as  he  had  need  of  a  conference  with  him  on  this  matter.55  This 
feeling  at  the  Tuileries  was  an  incentive  to  Terrier  to  keep  in- 
formed upon  the  situation.  He  showed  the  greatest  solicitude  for 
the  royal  family  from  this  moment  on. 

The  assembly  held  a  session  on  this  same  evening,  June  19, 
which  was  full  of  interest  because  of  two  occurrences,  the  read- 
ing of  the  petition  of  the  Marseillais  and  of  the  decree  of  the 
directory.  A  deputation  of  citizens  from  Marseilles  was  intro- 
duced at  the  bar  of  the  assembly  and  announced  that  the  liberty 
of  France  was  in  danger  and  that  the  free  men  of  the  south  were 
ready  to  march  to  its  defense.  They  continued : 

"The  day  of  the  people's  anger  has  arrived.  The  people  they  have 
tried  to  kill  and  chain  down  is  weary  of  defending  itself  and  now  is  ready 
to  take  the  offensive;  weary  of  baffling  conspiracies  .  .  .  the  generous  lion, 


"Aulard,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  9;  Correspondance  entre  le  comte 
de  Mirabeau  et  le  comte  de  La  March,  III,  318,  Montmorin  to  La  Marck, 
June  19,  1792;  "Rapport  de  police,  Observations  de  19  juin,"  Soltho 
Douglas,  Archives  Nationales,  W/b  251 ;  "  Rapport  de  police,"  June  20, 
1792,  Archives  Nationales,  4387;  Annales  patriotiques,  No.  CLXXII,  p. 
757 ;  Journal  royalist,  No.  5,  p.  4 ;  Lettre  de  Blanc-Gilli.  depute  de  I'assem- 
blee  nationale,  June  21,  1792;  Paroy,  Memoires,  297;  L'indicateur,  No.  34, 
June  22,  1792. 

65  Letter  of  Petion  to  Romainvilliers,  June  18,  1792,  Archives  Nationales 
FT4474T0.  The  letter  from  Bayonne  was  enclosed. 

240 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  45 

today  enraged,  is  ready  to  spring  from  its  repose  upon  the  pack  of  its 
enemies.  Representatives,  the  popular  force  is  your  force.  You  have  it 
in  hand,  use  it.  Give  no  quarter  since  you  can  expect  none.  The  French 
people  ask  for  a  decree  authorizing  them  to  march  with  a  more  imposing 
force  than  any  heretofore.  Command  and  we  will  march  upon  the  cap- 
ital and  to  the  frontiers.  A  struggle  between  despotism  and  liberty  must 
be  a  struggle  to  the  death.  .  .  .  Representatives,  the  people  wish  absolutely 
to  finish  a  revolution  which  is  its  safety  and  its  glory,  which  is  the  honor 
of  the  human  mind ;  it  wishes  to  save  itself  and  to  save  you.  Ought  you 
to  prevent  this  sublime  movement?" 

This  shows  the  intensity  of  public  feeling  on  the  eve  of  June 
20.  The  petition  was  received  by  some  with  enthusiasm  and  by 
others  with  cries  of  "  incendiary  and  unconstitutional."  One 
member  thought  it  not  astonishing  that  men  born  under  burning 
skies  should  show  an  ardent  imagination  and  an  energetic  patriot- 
ism. After  a  lively  debate  and  amidst  applause  the  printing  was 
voted  and  it  was  decreed  that  a  copy  should  be  sent  to  each  of 
the  eighty-three  departments.56 

The  excitement  had  scarcely  died  down  when  the  president 
announced  that  the  minister  of  the  interior  had  addressed  a  decree 
of  the  directory  of  the  department  of  Paris  to  the  assembly.  The 
reading  was  called  for.  Immediately  Saladin  cried,  "  We  have  no 
time  to  lose  in  reading  it."  But  Becquet  insisted  upon  the  read- 
ing, saying  that  the  assembly  should  become  acquainted  with  the 
decrees  passed  by  the  administrative  body  when  it  is  a  question 
of  public  order ;  that  every  one  knew  that  the  people  were  being 
stirred  up  at  this  time,  and  that  it  was  understood  by  all  that  to- 
morrow would  be  a  stormy  day ;  that  the  reading  should  be  heard 
with  a  view  to  taking  action  on  the  subject.  Vergniaud  called 
forth  applause  and  laughter  by  some  sarcastic  remarks  about 
Becquet  being  always  so  constitutional  yet  wishing  to  overturn  the 
laws  so  that  the  national  assembly  might  occupy  itself  with  police 
measures.  He  opposed  the  reading  of  the  decree  of  the  depart- 
ment on  the  ground  that  if  the  assembly  listened  to  the  reading 
and  took  no  action  it  would  give  a  species  of  sanction  to  it  and 
free  the  officers  from  their  responsibility.  Rouyer  reminded  the 

56  Moniteur,  XII,  710;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  257; 
Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  546. 

241 


46  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

assembly  that  it  had  asked  the  mayor  to  report  the  situation  of 
the  city  every  day  and  that  it  could  scarcely  refuse  to  hear  the 
decree  of  the  department  that  shared  its  solicitude.  The  reading 
was  received  in  silence.57  Did  this  silence  signify  "tacit  approba- 
tion, calculated  indifference  or  disguised  blame?"  A  contempo- 
rary ventures  the  assertion  that  there  was  an  understanding  be- 
tween the  leaders  of  the  movement  and  the  principal  men  in  the 
assembly  to  the  effect  that  the  assembly  would  give  its  approval 
by  its  silence.58 

Meantime  the  excitement  in  the  faubourgs  had  reached  its 
highest  pitch.  In  the  faubourg  Saint- Antoine,  the  section  Quinze- 
Vingts  held  a  meeting  in  the  church,  Enfants-Trouvees,  begin- 
ning about  eight  o'clock  and  lasting  until  after  one.  It  was  at- 
tended by  over  a  thousand  citizens.  A  decree  was  passed  pro- 
viding for  the  section  to  join  with  other  sections  in  presenting  a 
petition  to  the  king  and  to  the  assembly  to  invite  the  commission- 
ers of  the  section,  the  commissioners  of  police  and  the  justice  of 
the  peace  to  go  with  them.  The  petition  to  the  assembly  was  read 
and  adopted.  A  deputation  from  the  committee  of  the  section 
Popincourt  presented  itself  asking  that  the  section  might  join  the 
Quinze-Vingts  in  presenting  the  petition  to  the  assembly.  This 
was  joyfully  received.  The  address  to  the  king  was  then  read 
and  adopted  with  slight  change. 

Chabot  then  spoke  to  the  meeting  informing  them  of  the  ad- 
dress of  the  Marseillais  which  had  been  read  in  the  legislative 
assembly  that  evening.  He  also  urged  the  citizens  to  go  to  the 
assembly  and  to  the  king  unarmed  and  to  conduct  themselves 
peacefully  and  with  moderation  on  the  morrow  and  so  to  give 
the  lie  to  the  semi-prophecy  of  Lafayette  on  the  subject  of  pre- 
tended regicides.  But  when  the  citizens  pronounced  strongly  in 
favor  of  going  to  the  assembly  armed,  the  president  of  the  sec- 
tion stated  that  Petion  in  a  letter  to  him  had  requested  that  they 
do  not  present  themselves  armed  either  to  the  k'ing  or  to  the 


m  Moniteur,  XII,  710-11;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  259. 
58  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  23. 

242 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  47 

assembly.59  It  is  also  said  that  Chabot  closed  his  address  with, 
"  My  children,  the  national  assembly  awaits  you  tomorrow,  with- 
out fail,  with  open  arms."60 

This  meeting  was  also  attended  by  Alexandre,  commandant  of 
the  battalion  Saint-Marcel.  It  was  here  according  to  his  own 
statement  that  he  received  his  summons  from  Petion  and  the 
administrators  of  police  to  meet  with  them  at  the  mayoralty  at 
nine  o'clock.  He  told  the  assembly  of  his  summons  and  asked 
them  not  to  dismiss  their  meeting  until  his  return.  He  came 
back,  he  claimed,  at  one  o'clock  and  gave  an  account  of  what  had 
passed  at  the  mayoralty.  He  also  learned  that  in  his  absence 
the  section  had  decided  to  march  on  the  morrow  and  he  was 
given  a  letter  by  the  president  of  the  section  asking  him  to  go  to 
the  meeting  place  on  the  Boulevard  de  1'Hopital  at  eight  o'clock 
in  the  morning.  During  the  day  he  had  received  a  letter  from 
the  president  of  the  section  of  the  Gobelins  asking  him  to  join  the 
citizens  on  the  march,  because  his  presence  would  help  to  maintain 
order  in  so  great  a  crowd  of  people.61  We  have  no  record  of 
Santerre's  attendance  at  this  meeting,  though  he  must  have  been 
there,  being  the  first  citizen  of  the  faubourg.  There  is  very  little 
evidence  of  Santerre's  activities  in  the  preparations  for  this  up- 
rising, but  there  is  no  doubt  whatever  of  his  leadership  on  the 
day  of  the  uprising.  According  to  the  testimony  of  three  other 
commandants  he  had  sent  invitations  by  letter  or  by  deputation  to 
them,  asking  them  to  march  with  the  battalion  Enfants-Trouvees 
on  the  2Oth  and  had  invited  clubs  in  their  district,  asking  their 
cooperation.  Newspapers  and  police  reports  also  show  him  the 
prime  mover.62 

Other  sections  besides  the  Quinze-Vingts  sat  all  night,  among 


'"  Proces-verbal  de  la  seance  du  19  juin  de  la  section  des  Quinze- 
Vingts,"  in  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  273,  p.  359-60. 

60 "  Declaration  de  Thurot,  volontaire  grenadier  de  bataillon  du  petit 
Saint- Antoine,  June  24,  1792 ;  "  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours, 
19.  Thurot  says  he  learned  this  from  a  man  who  had  attended  the 
meeting.  Roederer  does  not  state  his  authority. 

81 "  Rapport  d' Alexandre,"  Ternaux,  I,  407. 

6a "  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  dans  le  bataillon  du  Val-de-Grace " ; 
"  Section  de  Montreuil,  Proces-verbal  de  la  protestation  de  MM.  Bonneau 

243 


48  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

them  Popincourt  and  the  Gobelins.  These  heard  addresses,  passed 
decrees  and  exchanged  fraternal  deputations  with  each  other.  They 
also  sent  letters  to  the  commandants  urging  them  to  march  with 
the  people.63  Plainly,  there  was  activity  and  communication  all 
night  long  among  leaders,  officers,  clubs  and  sections  in  the  fau- 
bourgs. 

Of  Petion's  whereabouts  or  activities  from  the  close  of  the 
meeting  of  the  directory  till  nine  o'clock  that  evening  we  have  no 
record.  We  have  seen  that  he  called  the  chiefs  of  the  faubourgs 
to  him  at  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening.64  At  this  meeting  there 
were  four  administrators  of  police  present,  Panis,  Sergent,  Vig- 
ner  and  Perron,  and  four  or  more  commandants  of  battalions  of 
the  faubourgs,  Santerre  of  Enfants-Trouvees,  Alexandre  of 
Saint-Marcel,  Saint-Prix  of  Val-de-Grace,  Savin,  second  in  com- 
mand of  Saint-Marguerite,  and  possibly  Bonneau,  chief  of  the 
same  battalion.65  Toward  ten  o'clock  the  commandants  arrived, 
Alexandre  appearing  first  and  Saint-Prix  last.66 


et  Savin " ;  "  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier, 
Leveillard  et  Demantort." 

63 "  Proces-verbal  de  la  seance  du  19  juin  de  la  section  des  Quinze- 
Vingts "  in  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  273,  p.  359-60;  "Rapport 
d' Alexandre,"  Ternaux,  I,  407 ;  "  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  dans  le  bat- 
aillon  du  Val-de-Grace,"  No.  4,  des  Pieces  justificatives. 

84  The  letter  of  convocation  sent  to  Saint-Prix  is  found  in  Proclamation 
du  roi  et  recueil  de  pieces,  XXXV,  No.  I  of  Pieces  justificatives  added  to 
Saint-Prix's  report. 

' "  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  dans  le  bataillon  du  Val-de-Grace " ; 
"  Rapport  d' Alexandre,"  Ternaux  I,  407 ;  "  Rapport  et  conclusion  de  le 
procureur-general-syndic  du  departement "  in  Proclamation  du  roi  et 
recueil  de  pieces,  15 ;  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire."  Bonneau  is  not 
mentioned  by  name  as  attending  this  meeting.  Petion  says  he  summoned 
the  commandants  and  mentions  Santerre  and  Alexandre  and  the  "  other 
commandants."  Roederer  speaks  as  if  all  were  present.  Alexandre  names 
Santerre  and  "  other  commandants "  whom  he  did  not  know.  Saint- 
Prix  names  Alexandre,  Santerre  and  Savin.  Since  Bonneau  was  chief 
and  Savin  second  in  command  we  infer  that  Bonneau  was  one  of  the 
"  other  commandants." 

66  Alexandre  says  he  saw  Santerre  and  others  arrive.  Saint-Prix  says 
he  found,  when  he  arrived,  Santerre,  Alexandre  and  Savin. 

244 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  49 

Petion  and  the  administrators  of  police  asked  them  to  state  the 
disposition  of  the  citizens  in  their  sections  and  in  their  battalions. 
For  Santerre's  answer  we  have  only  Petion's  report,  but  Alex- 
and.re  and  Saint-Prix  have  left  their  own  accounts.  Each  would 
have  us  believe  that  he  answered  first  and  that  he  suggested 
legalizing  the  movement.  Santerre  assured  them  "that  nothing 
in  the  world  could  prevent  the  national  guards  and  the  citizens 
from  marching,  that  all  remonstrance  was  absolutely  useless,  that 
the  inhabitants  of  the  vicinity  of  Paris  had  joined  them,  that 
they  had  made  a  fete  day  of  it  and"that  they  would  answer  to  any 
argument  that  might  be  made,  'that  they  ought  to  receive  the 
same  treatment  as  others  whom  the  assembly  had  received.'  "67 
Alexandre  affirmed  that  the  same  sentiment  existed  in  his  fau- 
bourg and  declared  that  it  would  be  dangerous  to  use  force  to  pre- 
vent what  was  firmly  resolved  upon.  He  said  he  had  not  noticed 
any  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  insult  either  individ- 
uals or  the  constituted  authorities  and  that  a  wise  and  simple 
course  of  action  would  be  not  to  try  to  prevent  the  project,  but  to 
direct  it,  to  legalize  it  in  some  way  and  then  he  would  answer 
for  it.  He  said  in  reply  to  the  mayor's  reference  to  the  depart- 
mental decree  that  it  was  a  very  good  measure  in  itself  but  came 
too  late.  When  asked  what  his  personal  idea  was,  he  answered 
without  hesitation  that  if  the  citizens  did  not  change  their  minds 
he  had  resolved  to  march  with  them.  He  reasoned  that  if  he 
did  not  go,  he  would  irritate  his  fellow  citizens  and  lose  their 
confidence  and  still  not  prevent  the  march.  He  would  thus 
lose  the  personal  advantage  of  protection  for  his  person  and 
his  home  and  friends  and  thereby  gain  no  advantage  for  pub- 
lic affairs.  On  the  contrary,  if  he  marched  with  them  he 
would  keep  their  confidence  and  prevent  them  "  from  committing 
any  excesses  and  would  moderate  their  enthusiasm  and  their  im- 
patience, if  they  should  be  provoked  or  insulted,  as  there  was 
reason,  from  reports,  to  believe  they  would  be."68  Other  com- 
mandants did  not  answer  in  as  positive  a  manner  because  they  had 


67 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire " 
"  Rapport  d' Alexandre,"  in  Ternaux,  I,  407. 

245 


50  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

not  such  positive  knowledge  but  all  said  that  there  was  much  fer- 
mentation.69 Saint-Prix  told  the  mayor  that  six  weeks  before, 
all  was  peaceable  but  that  since  then  a  club  had  been  formed  at 
the  Porte  Saint-Marcel,  which  had  excited  the  people  and  in- 
duced them  to  carry  a  petition  under  arms  to  the  national  assem- 
bly and  to  the  king  and  that  this  club  had  been  invited  by  a  letter 
from  Santerre  to  join  his  battalion.  Santerre  admitted  the  cor- 
respondence, but  denied  that  he  had  taken  the  initiative.  Saint- 
Prix  then  advised  the  mayor  to  follow  what  he  considered  a 
policy  of  prudence.  He  said  that  since  he  could  not  prevent  the 
procession,  he  had  better  legalize  it.  He  advised  him  to  go  with 
the  municipality  to  the  place  of  assembling  and  read  the  decree  of 
the  department  and  state  to  the  people  in  a  proclamation  that  a 
petition  presented  under  arms  is  illegal  and  request  them  to  lay 
down  their  arms  before  entering  the  assembly  and  the  king's 
palace.  He  suggested  that  Petion  precede  the  petitioners  accom- 
panied by  officers  of  the  municipality  and  that  he  order  the  com- 
mandant to  furnish  a  number  of  volunteers  from  the  battalions 
to  protect  the  march  of  the  petitioners  and  so  give  it  a  legal 
character.70 

This  suggestion  struck  Petion  as  a  means  of  escape  from  his 
dilemma,  for  he  and  his  colleagues  feared  lest  they  should  be  re- 
duced to  the  necessity  of  using  force  against  a  great  multitude  of 
citizens.  They  withdrew  from  the  conference  into  an  adjoining 
apartment  and  consulted  together  in  regard  to  some  means  of  in- 
fluencing the  department  to  change  its  decree.71  At  about  mid- 
night Vigner  was  sent  to  Roederer  with  a  letter  signed  by  Petion 
and  the  four  administrators  of  police  stating  the  situation  in  the 
faubourgs  as  they  had  learned  it  from  the  commandants  and 
proposing  that  the  directory  adopt  some  means  that  would  be  at 
the  same  time  prudent  and  legal.  They  suggested  that  the  armed 
citizens  be  grouped  around  the  national  guard  under  the  authority 


1 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

"  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  dans  le  bataillon  du  Val-de-Grace." 
71 "  Rapport  d' Alexandra,"  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

246 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  51 

of  its  chiefs  and  that  the  magistrates  authorize  the  commandants 
of  the  battalions  to  march  with  them.72 

Petion  then  returned  to  the  leaders  of  the  faubourgs  and  dis- 
missed them  saying  he  would  inform  them  of  the  department's 
answer.  He  asked  them  to  write  to  their  commandant  and  request 
him  to  give  them  such  instructions  as  he  thought  suitable.  It 
was  now  one  o'clock  in  the  morning  of  the  2Oth.73  Vigner  on 
his  return  at  one-thirty  reported  that  Roederer  approved  Petion's 
suggestion  and  would  assemble  the  directory  to  act  upon  it. 
Petion,  feeling  sure  that  that  body  could  not  but  approve  his  sug- 
gestion, wrote  to  several  of  the  officers  to  come  to  the  mayoralty 
at  seven  o'clock  in  the  morning  to  bring  him  news.  He  then  re- 
tired.74 Meantime  Roederer  wrote  Petion  requesting  that  he  send 
an  administrator  of  police  with  a  letter  to  the  directory.75  Neither 
Petion  nor  Roederer  mention  this  letter  in  their  reports  and  we 
do  not  know  Roederer's  object  in  sending  for  the  administrator 
of  police. 

In  answer  to  Roederer's  call  the  directory  assembled  at  four 
o'clock  in  the  morning.76  After  a  lively  discussion  it  was  unan- 
imously recognized  that  they  could  not  receive  in  the  ranks  of 
the  national  guard  men  almost  wholly  unknown,  without  recog- 
nition, already  in  open  rebellion,  armed  with  all  sorts  of  weapons, 
who  might  sow  the  seeds  of  disorder  in  the  military  force  and 


72  The  mayor  and  administrators  of  police,  Petion,  Sergent,  Panis, 
Vigner  and  Perron  to  the  Directory,  June  20,  1792  at  midnight. 

1 "  Rapport    d'Alexandre " ;    "  Rapport    de    ce   qui    s'est    passe    dans    le 
bataillon   du   Val-de-Grace,"    Saint-Prix. 

74 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

75  We  have  not  this  letter  and  neither  Petion  nor  Roederer  mention  it 
in  their  accounts,  but  Petion's  letter  to  Roederer  at  five  o'clock  says  he  is 
sending  an  administrator  of  police  to  the  directory  "  in  accordance  with 
the  request  of  your  letter"  and  in  his  letter  to  Sergent  at  the  same  hour 
he  says,  "  go  immediately  to  the  directory  of  the  department  at  the  request 
of  the  enclosed  letter."  Petion  to  Roederer,  June  20,  1792,  five  o'clock 
a.  m.  Petion  to  Sergent,  June  20,  1792,  five  o'clock  a.  m.  Archives 
Nationales,  F7477470. 

78Roedeier,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  20. 

247 


52  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

in  case  of  sedition  make  it  impossible  to  act.77  They  replied 
to  Petion  with  a  letter  at  five  o'clock  saying,  "  We  can  not,  under 
any  circumstances,  compromise  the  law  which  we  have  sworn  to 
execute;  it  lays  down  our  duty  imperatively.  We  must  persist 
in  our  decree  of  yesterday."  Petion,  wakened  perhaps  by  Roed- 
erer's  messenger,  and  not  having  received  the  reply  from  the  di- 
rectory, sent  a  second  letter  by  Sergent  dated  at  five  o'clock.  This 
was  a  reply  to  Roederer's  call  for  an  administrator  of  police.  It 
stated  that  "the  measure  indicated  is  the  only  practicable  one 
especially  in  circumstances  where  the  citizens  cannot  be  notified 
and  are  already  assembled."78  In  addition  to  the  letter  Sergent 
made  a  strong  plea  to  the  directory,  still  in  session,  in  favor  of 
legalizing,  saying  that  the  citizens  had  taken  action  irrevocably 
and  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  prevent  their  movement.  They 
answered  him  that  they  would  give  a  general  alarm  and  Sergent 
reminded  them  that  for  such  a  course  written  orders  were  neces- 
sary.79 But  they  persisted  in  their  decree  and  Roederer  answered 
Petion's  letter  by  a  postscript  written  on  the  decree  of  the  direct- 
ory stating  that  the  decision  could  not  be  changed.80 

The  directory  then  wrote  to  the  commandant  at  five-thirty 
o'clock  renewing  instructions  to  him  to  discharge  his  duty  in  con- 
formity with  the  decree  of  the  night  before,  even  to  calling  the 
troops  under  arms,  if  the  danger  were  pressing.81  They  also 
wrote  to  the  minister  of  the  interior  at  six  o'clock  to  tell  him  of 
the  proposition  of  the  municipality  and  of  the  directory's  peremp- 
tory refusal,  enclosing  copies  of  the  correspondence,  and  stating 


77  Decree  of  the  directory  of  July  6,  1792,  which  suspended  Petion  from 
office. 

78  Petion  to  Roederer,  five  o'clock  a.  m.,  June  20,   1792.     Petion  in  his 
report  omits  mention  of  this  second  letter  which  is  mentioned  by  both 
Roederer  and  Sergent. 

79 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent."  According  to  the  law  of  Nov. 
20,  1791,  the  mayor  alone  had  the  right  to  give  orders  in  such  cases. 
"  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier,  Levillard  et 
Demantort,"  249. 

80  Directory  to  the   mayor   and   municipal   officers,   June  20,    1/92,    five 
o'clock  a.  m. ;  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  20. 

81  Directory  to  the  commandant,  June  20,  1792,  five-thirty  a.  m. 

248 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  53 

their  orders  to  the  commandant.  They  wrote  him  again  at  seven 
o'clock  saying  the  faubourgs  would  present  a  petition  but  would 
go  unarmed.82  Thus,  we  see,  the  directory,  in  contrast  with  the 
municipality,  showed  great  interest  in  suppressing  the  movement. 
Roederer  and  the  greater  part  of  the  members  spent  the  night 
in  the  hall  and  held  a  full  session  at  four  o'clock,  in  the  morning. 
As  we  have  seen  they  answered  dispatches  of  the  municipality 
and  gave  orders  to  the  commandant  of  the  national  guards.  They 
also  sent  out  officers  to  learn  the  state  of  Paris  and  decided  to  go 
to  the  assembly  as  soon  as  it  should  meet  in  the  morning  to  say 
to  that  body  that  the  custom  which  it  had  established  of  receiving 
armed  deputations  in  its  midst  was  responsible  for  this  situation, 
was  the  obstacle  to  the  success  of  the  remonstrances  against  these 
petitioners.83  The  refusal  of  the  directory  destroyed  all  Petion's 
plans.  He  says  he  was  overwhelmed  with  the  thought  of  the 
abyss  into  which  this  act  might  plunge  his  fellow  citizens.  Nev- 
ertheless he  executed  the  ideas  of  the  directory.  He  wrote  to 
the  four  chiefs  of  the  battalions,  Santerre,  Alexandre,  Saint-Prix 
and  Bonneau,  saying,  "  We  inform  you  again  that  you  can  not 
assemble  in  arms.  See  in  this  connection  the  letter  that  the 
directory  has  sent  us.  After  this  letter  we  understand  too  well 
your  patriotism  not  to  expect  that  you  will  conform,  and  instruct 
your  fellow  citizens."84  These  letters  were  received  by  Alexan- 
dre at  seven  o'clock  and  by  Saint-Prix  at  seven-thirty.  Their 
answers  expressed  a  willingness  to  execute  the  order  but  Alex- 
andre said  he  could  not  answer  for  anything.85  After  writing 


"Directory  to  Terrier,  June  20,  1792,  six  o'clock  a.  m. ;  Directory  to 
Terrier,  June  20,  1792,  seven  o'clock  a.  m.  in  Rapport  du  ministre  de 
I'interieur. 

83  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  23. 

1 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire  " ;  "  Rapport  de  qui  s'est  passe  dans 
le  bataillon  du  Val-de-Grace  "  in  "Pieces  justificatives,"  No.  Ill,  "  Proces- 
verbal  de  la  protestation  de  MM.  Bonneau  et  Savin"  in  same,  No.  IX; 
The  only  direct  statement  that  Santerre  received  this  letter  is  made  by 
these  other  men ;  "  Rapport  d'Alexandre,"  Ternaux,  I,  407 ;  Longchamp  to 
Petion,  June  20,  1792,  in  Archives  Nationales  FT477470. 

85  Alexandre  to  Petion,  June  20,  1792,  Archives  Nationales  FT4774T0.  The 
original  of  this  letter  is  signed  Renaud,  Com.  of  Saint-Marcel.  I  have  not 

249 


54  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

these  letters  Petion  at  once  convoked  the  municipality  for  the 
morning.86  While  waiting  for  the  members  to  assemble  and 
realizing  the  gravity  of  the  situation  he  sent  some  administrators 
of  police,  Sargent  and  Panis  to  the  faubourg  Saint- Antoine  and 
Perron  and  Vigner  to  the  faubourg  Saint-Marcel.  This  was  be- 
tween seven  and  eight  o'clock.87  At  about  eight-thirty  he  sent 
three  municipal  officers  to  the  faubourg  Saint-Marcel  where  there 
seemed  to  be  the  greatest  fermentation.  He  charged  them  to 
make  every  effort  to  prevent  the  gathering  of  armed  men  or  to 
disperse  them  if  they  were  already  gathered,  and  to  prevent  the 
union  of  others  with  them.88 

The  commandants  of  the  battalions  of  the  faubourgs  now 
found  themselves  with  conflicting  instructions.  They  were  sub- 
ject to  extra  requisitions  from  their  sections  as  well  as  to  orders 
from  the  commandant  of  the  national  guards.  As  noted  above, 
the  sections  that  had  remained  sitting  all  night  asked  their  com- 
mandants to  march  with  them.  We  saw  that  Alexandre  had  been 
asked  by  the  Gobelins  and  the  Quinze-Vingts  to  march  with  them. 
The  section  of  the  Gobelins  by  a  decree  asked  Saint-Prix  to  march 
at  their  head  and  help  them  in  the  ceremony  of  planting  the  liberty 
tree  on  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants.  He  answered  that  he  could 
not  lead  his  battalion  without  a  legal  order,  but  as  a  citizen  he 
would  go  to  the  section  unarmed.  In  addition  to  these  invitations 
three  commandants,  Santerre,  Alexandre,  and  Saint-Prix,  re- 
ceived during  the  night  a  written  order  through  the  acting  chief 
of  the  second  legion,  to  which  their  battalions  belonged,  to  hold 
themselves  in  readiness  to  march  at  the  first  order.  This  came 
by  order  of  the  general  commandant.89  This  commandant  of  the 

been  able  to  find  why  it  is  so  signed.  It  is  plainly  Alexandre's  answer 
to  Petion  for  he  was  commandant  of  Saint-Marcel.  He  adds  a  P.  S.,  say- 
ing "  Perron  is  with  me  and  we  are  going  to  the  gathering  to  disperse 
them."  Perron  in  his  "  Proces-verbal "  confirms  Alexandre's  P.  S. 

86 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire,"  8. 

87  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Per- 
ron." As  we  shall  see  later  he  did  not  convoke  all  the  members. 

88 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM.  Mouchet,  Guiard  et  Thomas." 

80 "  Rapport  d'Alexandre,"  Ternaux  I,  407 ;  "  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe 
dans  le  bataillon  du  Val-de- Grace "  in  "Pieces  justificatives,"  Nos.  II  and 

250 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  55 

national  guards,  who  for  the  month  of  June  was  Romainvilliers, 
was  as  embarrassed  as  his  subordinates.  After  Petion  had  dis- 
missed the  commandants  of  the  faubourgs  at  one  o'clock  at 
night  he  requested  Alexandre  to  write  to  the  general  commandant 
and  inform  him  of  what  was  occurring  in  the  sections  and  ask 
for  such  instructions  as  the  chief  thought  suitable.  Alexandre 
dispatched  this  letter  to  Romainvilliers  by  a  soldier  at  four  o'clock 
in  the  morning.  At  six  o'clock,  he  received  the  response  which 
he  says  was  given  only  after  a  half-hour's  complaint  about  the 
difficulty  of  his  position  and  the  hard  lot  of  being  wakened  at  five 
o'clock  when  one  has  retired  as  late  as  ten,  all  good  and  true  prin- 
ciples, Alexandre  remarked,  but  having  no  application  to  the 
circumstances.90  The  commandant's  response  referred  to  the 
law  which  forbade  marching  without  a  written  order,91  and  yet 
as  we  saw  before,  Santerre,  Alexandre  and  Saint-Prix  had  all 
received  instructions  at  one  o'clock  this  night  by  his  orders  to 
hold  themselves  ready  to  march  at  the  first  call.  Many  other 
officers  also  had  this  order.  At  eight  o'clock  in  the  morning  the 
commandant  went  to  the  Hotel  de  Ville  where  he  had  been  sum- 
moned by  the  mayor  to  await  precise  orders  from  the  municipal 
corps,  Petion  having  told  him  the  day  before  that  the  case  was 
too  serious  for  him  to  act  without  the  cooperation  of  the 
municipality.92 

The    faubourgs,    Saint-Marcel   and    Saint-Antoine,    had   been 
assembled  since  five  o'clock  in  the  morning.93     At  the  faubourg 

IV,  "  Addition  ail  rapport  que  le  commandant,"  No.  XXXI,  in  same ; 
"  Rapport  de  Legard." 

90  "  Rapport  <T Alexandre,"  Ternaux  I,  407.     In  this  connection  Alexan- 
dre quotes  from  Scarron, 

"  Cette   response  est  bonne  et  belle, 
Mais  en  enfer  de  quoi  sert-elle?" 

91  Alexandre  to  Petion,  June  20,  1792.     This  letter  tells  Petion  that  Alex- 
andre has  written  to  the  commandant  as  he  was  instructed  to  do  and  gives 
the  substance  of  the  commandant's  answer.     Romainvilliers  omits  all  men- 
tion of  this  information  and  order  from  Petion  in  his  report;  "Rapport 
que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers "  and  "  Addition  au  rapport." 

92 "  Rapport  que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers  "  and  "  Addition  au  rapport " ; 
"  Declaration  de  Desmousseaux." 

251 


56  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Saint-Antoine  the  decree  of  the  directory  had  been  posted  during 
the  night  and  crowds  of  people  armed  and  unarmed  were  angrily 
commenting  upon  it.  Sergent  and  Panis,  the  administrators  of 
police  sent  out  by  Petion,  reached  this  faubourg  at  about  eight 
o'clock.  They  were  soon  recognized  and  surrounded.  They 
urged  the  people  to  lay  down  their  arms,  showing  them  that  it 
was  illegal  to  present  a  petition  in  arms.  The  people  assured  them 
that  they  had  no  intention  of  abandoning  their  arms  and  that 
they  did  not  intend  to  attack  the  assembly  nor  the  king.  They 
said  they  had  two  objects,  one  to  form  a  procession  for  the  twenty 
legal  petitioners  who  wished  to  present  a  petition  to  the  assembly 
and  to  the  king,  the  other  to  celebrate  the  anniversary  of  the  oath 
of  the  tennis  court  by  planting  a  maypole  in  military  fashion. 
Besides  they  said  they  feared  they  would  be  fired  upon  at  the 
Tuileries.  The  committee  of  the  section  Quinze-Vingts  in  this 
faubourg  was  in  session  surrounded  by  a  great  crowd  of  citizens 
armed  and  unarmed  arid  with  or  without  uniforms.  Here  the 
battalion  Enfants-Trouvees  was  assembled  with  officers.  San- 
terre  was  the  central  figure  here  and  the  mayor's  letter  stating  the 
intention  of  the  directory  was  the  subject  of  discussion.  Panis 
and  Sergent  continued  their  efforts  to  induce  the  people  to 
respect  the  law,  but  in  vain.  Santerre,  after  inviting  the  adminis- 
trators of  police  to  go  with  them,  referred  the  question  to  the 
people  and  they  shouted  that  other  armed  deputations  and 
battalions  had  been  received  by  the  assembly  and  that  the 
directory  had  not  opposed  them,  that  the  law  was  the  same  for 
all,  and  that  they  also  would  be  received.  After  more  vain 
efforts  to  execute  the  law,  the  officers  withdrew  and  on  going 
into  the  street  saw  a  part  of  an  armed  battalion  and  a  street  full 
of  citizens  whose  spirits  were  dominated  with  joy.  The  maypole, 
loaded  on  a  wagon,  was  in  their  midst.  Commissioners  of  the 
section  and  commissioners  of  police  came  to  join  the  citizens  and 
a  banner  inscribed,  "  In  commemoration  of  the  oath  of  the  tennis 
court,"  was  carried  aloft.  '  Sergent  and  Paris  then  set  out  toward 
the  Place  de  la  Bastille  where  they  saw  armed  citizens  continually 

1 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

252 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  57 

coming  .from  various  directions  and  applauded  by  the  citizens. 
The  administrators  of  police  then  entered  a  cafe  and  had  break- 
fast.94 

In  the  same  faubourg  the  committee  of  the  neighboring  section 
Montreuil  was  in  session  this  morning  concerting  with  the  police 
in  an  attempt  to  maintain  order.  A  deputation  from  the  section 
Quinze-Vingts  composed  of  an  officer,  some  soldiers,  and  some 
citizens,  came  in  the  name  of  Santerre  to  invite  Bonneau  and 
Savin,  commandants  of  the  battalion  Sainte-Marguerite  to  march 
with  their  battalion,  following  thajt-  of  the  Enfants-Trouvees. 
Bonneau  answered  them  with  Petion's  letter  which  stated  the 
decree  of  the  directory  and  which  appealed  to  the  patriotism  of 
the  chiefs  as  a  guarantee  that  the  law  would  not  be  violated.  The 
deputation  answered  that  the  battalion  Enfants-Trouvees  had 
received  the  same  order  but  represented  that  it  had  been  revoked. 
Bonneau  did  not  give  credence  to  this  report,  but  when  a  great 
number  of  citizens  and  of  national  guards  manifested  a  desire 
to  march  with  their  friends  of  the  Quinze-Vingts,  he  yielded  be- 
cause he  wished  to  avoid  the  evils  which  would  follow  a  deter- 
mined resistance.  However,  he  and  Savin,  his  second  in  com- 
mand, entered  a  formal  protest  to  the  committee  to  the  effect  that 
they  had  not  violated  explicit  orders,  but  had  acted  by  constraint.95 

In  the  faubourg  Saint-Marcel  even  more  violent  scenes  were 
taking  place  at  the  same  hour  and  in  more  than  one  part  of  the 
faubourg.  According  to  instructions  received  during  the  night 
from  the  chief  of  their  legion  and  the  letter  of  Petion  received 
at  seven  thirty,  Saint-Prix  and  his  second  in  command,  Leclerc, 
arrived  early  at  the  headquarters  of  their  battalion,  Val-de- 
Grace.  They  found  it  surrounded  by  a  crowd  of  armed  men  who 
wished  to  force  the  volunteers  to  go  with  them.  The  command- 
ants recalled  the  law  and  showed  the  crowd  the  orders  which  they 
had  received  but  protestations,  efforts  and  entreaties  were  useless. 


94 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent."  These  men  have  been  criticized 
by  some  writers  for  stopping  to  eat  breakfast.  (Ternaux  I,  I55~56.)  But 
we  have  seen  them  on  duty  all  night  long  so  can  understand  their  need. 

96 "  Section  de  Montreuil,  Proces-verbal  de  la  protestation  de  MM.  Bon- 
neau et  Savin." 

253 


58  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

They  were  insulted.  The  crowd  tried  to  take  their  cannon  from 
them.  The  commandants  asked  to  put  armed  men  in  front  of 
the  cannon  to  protect  it,  but  all  was  useless.  The  people  were 
impatient  because  the  hour  for  joining  the  faubourg  Saint- 
Antoine  was  passing.  They  asked  for  a  drummer  but  before 
Saint-Prix  could  give  him  orders  his  own  volunteers  of  the 
battalion  urged  the  crowd  to  possess  itself  of  their  cannon  and, 
the  cannoneers  abandoning  their  pieces,  the  people  did  so.  Seeing 
themselves  defeated  by  this  act  of  insubordination  on  the  part  of 
the  cannoners,  Leclerc  and  Saint-Prix  rushed  in  front  of  the 
crowd,  orders  in  one  hand  and  sword  in  the  other.  But  realizing 
that  only  one  adjutant  supported  them,  they  recalled  the  can- 
noneers to  their  pieces  and  yielded  to  the  demands  of  the  crowd. 
But  on  the  way  the  two  commandants  called  upon  the  spectators 
to  witness  that  they  were  "  forced  to  march  by  violence  and 
insubordination."96 

In  another  part  of  the  faubourg  the  committee  of  the  section  of 
the  Gobelins  was  assembled  in  the  basement  of  the  Marche-aux- 
Chevaux.  Perron  who  had  been  sent  out  by  Petion  at  seven 
o'clock  to  engage  the  citizens  to  give  up  their  project  reached  the 
faubourg  soon  after.  He  went  to  Alexandre,  commandant  of 
the  battalion  Saint-Marcel,  who  accompanied  him  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  section.  Perron  stated  his  mission  and  in  company 
with  Alexandre,  the  president  of  the  committee  and  a  commis- 
sioner of  police  went  to  the  meeting-place  on  the  boulevard 
Salpetriere.  Here  they  found  a  part  of  the  battalion  Saint- 
Marcel  with  arms  and  cannon  and  a  large  assemblage  of  men  and 
women  with  all  kinds  of  arms.  After  beating  a  drum  to  get 
attention,  Alexandre,  surrounded  by  the  citizens,  stated  the  object 
of  their  mission  and  then  read  the  letter  of  the  chief  of  the  legion, 
the  letter  of  the  commandant,  the  letter  of  the  directory  and  the 


86 "  Rapport  de  ce  que  s'est  passe  dans  le  bataillon  du  Val-de-Grace," 
par  Saint-Prix;  Longchamp,  Capt  4"  Co.,  10"  Bat.,  2d  Legion,  to  Petion, 
June  20,  1792,  in  Archives  Nationales,  F7477470;  Weber,  Memoires,  II, 
181,  refers  to  a  letter  which  he  says  was  written  by  an  eye  witness  and  a 
member  of  the  former  States  General,  which  bears  out  this  statement. 
Weber  does  not  give  the  author's  name. 

254 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  59 

mayor's  official  message  and  asked  them  to  listen  to  the  adminis- 
trator of  police.  Perron  urged  the  people  to  obey  the  laws  and 
tried  to  induce  them  to  lay  down  their  arms  and  take  the  cannon 
back  to  the  guardhouse,  but  their  murmurs  became  violent.  The 
people  feared  that  their  march  would  be  stopped  at  the  military 
posts  on  the  way  and  that  they  would  be  repelled  by  force  from 
the  interior  of  the  chateau.  Consequently  Perron  could  not 
shake  their  resolution  to  carry  out  their  idea.  The  people,  how- 
ever, did  not  appear  hostile,  but  assured  him  that  they  had  but 
two  objects,  the  first  to  pay  their  respects  to  the  assembly  and  to 
the  king,  the  second  to  renew  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court  and  to 
convince  him  of  their  good  intentions  they  invited  him  to  march 
at  their  head.  One  of  the  volunteers  said  openly  to  Alexandre, 
"  Sir,  you  will  be  forced  to  march."  Seeing  that  all  their  efforts 
were  unavailing,  Alexandre  asked  Perron  to  report  what  had 
happened  here  for  the  justification  of  both  of  them  and  Perron 
returned  to  the  municipality.97  Thorillon,  a  member  of  the 
national  assembly  and  a  justice  of  the  peace  in  the  faubourg 
Saint-Marcel,  on  hearing  of  the  gathering  went  to  the  command- 
ant and  to  the  commissioner  of  police  and  finally  to  the  committee 
of  the  section.  He  learned  of  the  people's  determination  to  go  in 
spite  of  the  remonstrance  of  the  administrator  of  police  who 
reminded  them  of  the  law  and  of  the  decree  of  the  directory. 
While  the  commandant  of  the  battalion  was  gone  to  join  the 
other  officers  the  crowd  possessed  itself  of  cannon  with  a  view 
to  beginning  their  march.  The  committee  of  the  section,  despair- 
ing because  of  this  disobedience,  charged  Thorillon  with  making 
a  report  of  the  situation  to  the  assembly  and  asking  it  to  execute 
the  law.98 

At  the  time  of  departure  the  three  municipal  officers  who  had 
been  sent  out  by  Petion  at  eight-thirty  arrived.  They  had  made 
their  way  through  lines  of  curious  spectators  who  were  watching 
for  the  procession.  The  officers  met  the  procession,  preceded  by  the 
two  cannon,  opposite  the  hospital  Saltpetriere.  Soon  they  were 


"  Rapport  d'Alexandre  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Perron." 
98  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  264;  Journal  de  I'assemblee 
national  e,  XXI,  301. 

255 


60  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

surrounded  by  the  crowd  of  people  of  all  ages,  both  sexes,  armed 
and  unarmed,  many  in  uniform,  grenadiers,  fusileers  and  light 
infantry  with  the  flag  in  their  midst.  The  officers  reminded  them 
of  the  law,  of  the  orders  given  them,  and  of  the  departmental 
decree,  but  the  crowd  assured  them  that  their  intentions  were 
good,  that  they  did  not  wish  to  commit  any  disorder,  that  they 
only  wished  to  present  their  respects  to  the  assembly,  to  celebrate 
the  oath  of  the  tennis  court,  and  to  plant  a  liberty  tree  to  per- 
petuate its  memory.  They  said  again  that  the  assembly  had  re- 
ceived other  petitioners  and  they  did  not  see  why  they  should  not 
be  received.  The  officers  appealed  to  them  in  the  name  of  the 
country  and  in  the  name  of  humanity  to  consider  the  frightful 
evils  which  might  follow  their  conduct,  but  the  citizens  answered 
that  no  one  had  cause  to  fear  and  that  they  would  guarantee  that 
no  disorder  would  be  committed,  but  that  nothing  could  prevent 
them  from  marching.  The  magistrates  reminded  them  that  in 
order  to  be  good  officers  they  were  forced  to  execute  the  law, 
whereupon  the  citizens  answered  that  they  recognized  this  fact 
and  that  they  also  would  be  good  citizens  and  that  if  cannon  were 
to  be  used  against  them  they  also  must  have  some.  They  then 
asked  the  officers  to  carry  their  flags.  Whereupon  the  crowd 
yielded  to  its  impatience  and  cried,  "En  avant!  monsieur  le  com- 
mandant, en  avant!"  and  Alexandre  gave  the  order  to  march. 
The  officers  returned  to  the  municipality  where  they  made  their 
report.  At  the  same  time,  the  municipality  of  Gentilly  arrived 
and  asked  permission  to  join  the  procession." 

During  all  this  excitement  a  crowd  had  gathered  in  the  neigh- 
boring section  Jardin  des  Plantes  trying  to  take  away  from  the 
commandant  of  the  battalion,  Laffond,  his  cannon.  He  dis- 
patched two  letters  to  Petion  asking  for  instructions.100 

Meanwhile  at  the  Hotel  de  Ville  the  mayor  had  not  been  idle. 
We  have  seen  that  when  Petion  learned  that  the  directory  refused 
on  the  ipth  to  legalize  the  procession  he  had  great  fear  of  the 

99  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM.  Mouchet,  Guiard  et  Thomas  " ;  "  Con- 
duite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire."    Alexandre  in  his  Memoires  says  he  gave 
the  order  to  march,  Masson,  Petites  histoires,  I.  serie,  246-58. 

100  Laffond  to  Petion,  June  20,  1792,  in  Archives  Nationales  F7447470. 

256 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  61 

consequences  and  so  dispatched  an  order  to  the  commandants  of 
the  battalions  urging  them  to  obey  the  decree  of  the  directory. 
We  also  saw  that  he  then  convoked  the  municipality  for  the 
morning  of  the  2Oth  and  sent  several  municipal  officers  and 
some  administrators  of  police  to  the  faubourgs,  but  he  gave  no 
order  to  the  commandant  of  the  national  guard  who  came  to  him 
at  eight  o'clock  in  the  morning  as  requested.  He  kept  him  wait- 
ing until  eleven-thirty  while  the  municipality  held  its  session.101 
The  attendance  was  not  full.  According  to  the  statement  of  four 
of  the  municipal  officers,  Borie,  Desmousseaux,  J.  J.  Leroux  and 
Jallier,  they  did  not  receive  their  summons  until  nine  o'clock  and 
Champion  states  that  he  received  none  at  all.102  When  the  ses- 
sion opened,  Petion  communicated  to  them  the  reports  that  he 
had  received  from  the  administrators  of  police  and  the  corre- 
spondence with  the  department.  He  told  them  that  it  was  not 
possible  to  stop  the  march  of  so  great  a  crowd  of  citizens  and 
suggested  to  them  what  he  said  seemed  the  only  reasonable  thing 
to  do  under  the  circumstances — to  legalize  the  procession.  In 
order  to  do  this  it  would  be  necessary  to  authorize  the  battalions 
to  march  and  to  rally  the  armed  citizens  in  the  midst  of  them 
and  under  the  command  of  the  chiefs.103  They  then  passed  the 
following  decree :  "  The  municipal  corps  being  informed  that  a 
great  number  of  citizens  in  all  kinds  of  uniforms  and  all  kinds  of 
arms  propose  to  present  themselves  to  the  national  assembly  and 
to  the  king  to  present  an  address  and  to  celebrate  at  the  same  time 
the  anniversary  of  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court,  decrees :  That  the 
chief  of  the  legion,  commandant  of  the  national  guard  shall 
immediately  give  the  necessary  orders  to  assemble  under  the  flag 
citizens  in  all  kinds  of  uniforms,  with  all  kinds  of  arms,  who 
will  march  thus  assembled  under  the  command  of  the  officers  of 
the  battalions."104  According  to  statements  of  three  municipal 

101 "  Rapport  que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers " ;  "  Declaration  du  sieur 
Desmousseaux." 

103 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M.  Borie " ;  "  Declaration  de  M.  J.  J. 
Leroux,"  "  Declaration  de  M.  Jallier " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M. 
Champion  " ;  "  Declaration  du  sieur  Desmousseaux." 

103 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

104  Decree  of  the  municipal  corps,  June  20,  1792. 

257 


62  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

officers,  Borie,  Leroux  and  Jallier,  they  arrived  at  the  meeting 
too  late  to  have  any  part  in  the  adoption  of  the  decree.  When 
Borie  expressed  his  displeasure  at  seeing  the  law  thus  violated 
Mouchet  answered  that  the  circumstances  did  not  permit  of  any 
other  action.105  The  law  of  March  27,  1791  forbade  the  munici- 
pality to  act  contrary  to  a  decree  of  the  directory.106  After  pass- 
ing this  decree,  the  municipality  adjourned  and  the  members  were 
sent  by  Petion  to  the  various  places  where  the  procession  was  to 
pass  to  see  that  everything  passed  off  in  an  orderly  manner, 
especially  at  the  assembly  and  the  chateau.107 

The  commandant,  who  had  been  at  the  city  hall  awaiting  orders 
since  eight  o'clock,  received  a  copy  of  the  decree  of  the  municipal 
corps  at  eleven-thirty  and  returned  to  the  headquarters  of  the  na- 
tional guard  where  he  found  contradictory  orders  from  the  min- 
ister of  the  interior  and  the  directory.  The  minister  of  the  interior 
wrote  to  the  directory  at  nine  o'clock,  "  Without  delay  give  orders 
to  the  troops  to  march  to  the  defense  of  the  chateau."  This  letter 
was  at  once  sent  to  the  commandant  with  an  emphatic  order  from 
the  directory  "  to  lose  not  an  instant "  in  sending  troops  to  defend 
the  Tuileries.  The  directory  not  receiving  an  answer  to  this  order, 
because  the  commandant,  as  we  have  seen,  was  at  the  Hotel  de 
Ville,  sent  another  order  to  the  headquarters  still  more  explicit, 
requiring  him,  or  in  his  absence,  the  first  officer  in  service  to 
"lend  the  help  of  the  national  guard  or  to  summon  troops  of  the 
line  to  assure  by  all  means  possible,  even  by  force  of  arms,  the 
safety  of  the  king  and  all  the  royal  family."108 

The  directory  of  the  department  sat  in  continued  session  on  this 


"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Borie." 

106 "  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier,  Leveillard 
et  Demantort,"  255.  The  Revolutions  de  Paris  says  (XII,  548)  that  this 
decree  was  wiser  than  that  of  the  directory. 

107 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM. 
Mouchet  et  Boucher  Saint-Saveur " ;  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris;" 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Boucher  Rene ; "  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Hu." 

108  Terrier  to  the  directory,  June  20,  1792,  nine  o'clock,  Directory  to  the 
commandant,  June  20,  1792,  nine  o'clock;  Directory  to  the  etat  major, 
June  20,  1792,  in  Ternaux  I,  162. 

258 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  63 

morning  and  kept  up  constant  communication  with  the  minister 
of  the  interior,  the  chateau  and  the  assembly.  The  minister  of  the 
interior  was  as  much  concerned  as  the  directory  in  the  keeping  of 
the  peace.  He  was  a  man  of  firmness  of  character  and  of  royalist 
sympathies.109  We  saw  that  he  wrote  a  letter  to  the  directory 
at  half  past  two  on  the  morning  of  the  iQth  and  received  a  reply 
and  that  at  six  o'clock  and  at  seven  the  directory  sent  him  dis- 
patches. At  eight  o'clock  he  wrote  to  the  king  rendering  him  an 
account  of  what  was  happening  and  assured  him  that  he  would 
come  to  his  assistance.110  At  the  same  hour  he  wrote  two  letters 
to  the  directory  applauding  their  action  and  saying  that  the  king 
wished  that  any  attempt  to  enter  the  chateau  should  be  resisted.111 
At  nine  o'clock  he  dispatched  the  order  which  we  have  seen  above 
to  the  directory  for  the  commandant  and  received  their  reply.112 
At  eleven  o'clock  he  again  wrote  the  directory  saying  that  the 
king  desired  two  members  of  the  department  to  come  to  the 
Tuileries  to  report  the  state  of  the  city  and  to  take  precautionary 
measures.113 

The  legislative  assembly  met  about  noon  on  the  2oth,  'but  did 
not  turn  its  attention  at  first,  as  might  have  been  expected,  to  a 
consideration  of  the  threatened  uprising.  After  some  other  busi- 
ness had  been  brought  before  it,  the  president  announced  that 
the  directory  of  the  department  wished  to  be  admitted.114  The 
directory  had  shown  great  interest  in  trying  to  prevent  the  pro- 
cession and  had  been  in  session  since  four  o'clock  in  the  morning, 
as  we  have  seen,  adjourning  to  attend  the  assembly  as  soon  as 


109  Mercy  to  Kaunitz,  June  27,  1792,  Glagau,  Die  franzosische  Legislative, 
339- 

10  Terrier  to  Louis  XVI,  June  20,  1792,  eight  o'clock,  in  Archives  Na- 
tionales,  C  185. 

^Terrier  to  the  directory,  June  20,  1792,  eight  o'clock  in  Rapport  du 
ministre  de  I'interieur. 

112 Terrier  to  the  directory,  June  20,  1792,  nine  o'clock;  Directory  to 
Terrier,  June  20,  1792,  in  Rapport  du  ministre  de  I'interieur. 

L13  Terrier  to  the  directory,  June  20,  1792,  eleven  o'clock  a.  m.  in  Revue 
retrospective,  2.  serie,  I,  170. 

™Moniteur,  XII,  711;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  263; 
Proces-verbal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  376. 

259 


64  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

that  body  convened.115  They  were  admitted  at  once  and  Roederer 
addressed  the  meeting.  He  said,  "An  extraordinary  gathering 
of  armed  men  exists  at  this  moment  in  spite  of  the  law,  in  spite 
of  two  decrees,  one  of  the  commune,  the  other  of  the  depart- 
ment." He  went  on  to  explain  that  the  gathering  was  composed 
of  persons  of  various  intentions  and  that  it  had  several  objects 
in  view.  The  object  of  the  great  majority  of  the  people,  he  said, 
was  certainly  to  plant  a  liberty  tree,  to  hold  a  civic  fete,  and  to 
present  a  new  tribute  of  its  homage  to  the  national  assembly,  but 
he  thought  there  was  reason  to  fear  that  the  attempt  to  present 
a  petition  to  the  king  would  be  supported  by  force  and  as  armed 
petitioners  they  should  not  be  permitted  to  take  such  action. 
He  added  that  reports  made  during  the  night  justified  these  fears 
and  that  a  letter  from  the  minister  of  the  interior  at  nine  o'clock 
had  advised  the  directory  to  order  out  troops  at  once  to  defend 
the  chateau  because  the  latest  reports  indicated  pressing  danger. 
He  pleaded  for  the  execution  of  the  decree  of  the  directory  and 
of  the  wishes  of  the  minister  of  the  interior  expressed  in  his 
letter.  He  said  the  directory  felt  responsible  to  the  nation  for 
the  security  of  the  assembly  and  of  Paris.  He  again  called  atten- 
tion to  the  law  forbidding  all  armed  assemblies  and  all  unarmed 
ones  except  by  permission  of  the  municipality,  and  to  the  law 
against  deputations  of  more  than  twenty  persons  for  the  purpose 
of  presenting  petitions.  He  said  that  while  today  men  might 
be  assembled  for  civic  purposes,  tomorrow  there  might  assemble 
malcontents,  enemies  of  the  revolution  and  of  the  assembly.  He 
asked,  "  What  will  we  say  to  them?  What  obstacle  can  we  put 
in  the  way  of  their  gathering?  In  a  word,  how  can  we  and  the 
municipality  answer  for  your  safety  if  the  law  does  not  furnish 
the  means  ?  "  He  urged  the  assembly  to  uphold  the  law  and  not 
to  receive  this  armed  multitude  in  its  midst,  and  to  let  nothing 
diminish  its  obligation  to  die  for  the  sake  of  the  public  peace.116 


114  Roederer,   Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  23. 

™Moniteur,  XII,  711-12;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  261; 
Proccs-verbal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  367;  Journal  de  I'assemblee  na- 
tionale,  XXI,  296.  Roederer  cites  the  last  as  giving  the  text  of  his  ad- 
dresses. I  have  followed  it.  Le  patriot e  franqais,  No.  1046,  p.  689,  says 

260 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  65 

There  were  frequent  murmurs  from  the  galleries  during  this 
address  especially  when  the  good  intentions  of  the  people  were 
called  into  question.  There  was  little  applause. 

The  president,  Francois  de  Nantes,  after  quieting  the  galleries 
said,  "The  national  assembly  will  take  into  consideration  the 
account  that  you  have  submitted  to  it.  It  invites  you  to  attend 
its  session."  The  directory  then  entered  the  hall  amidst  murmurs 
of  the  galleries  and  applause  of  a  part  of  the  assembly.117 

The  conduct  of  the  Girondins  in  the  assembly  at  this  time 
shows  decided  sympathy  with  the  uprising.  Vergniaud  was  the 
first  speaker.  He  said  he  agreed  with  Roederer  that  civism  alone 
actuated  the  citizens,  but  that  the  assembly  ought  to  take  the  pre- 
cautions that  prudence  commanded  in  order  to  prevent  any  act 
that  might  be  provoked  by  the  ill-intentioned.  He  thought  it 
would  be  more  regular  if  both  they  and  the  constituent  assembly 
had  conformed  to  the  principles  that  forbade  the  introduction  of 
an  armed  force  into  the  legislative  body  because,  even  if  civism 
brought  men  here  today,  tomorrow  the  ill-intentioned  might  bring 
in  soldiers ;  that  the  sanctuary  of  the  law  ought  to  be  open  only 
to  legislators;  that  by  following  the  example  of  the  constitutent 
assembly  they  had  been  abettors  of  irregular  conduct  of  the 
citizens  and  having  accorded  this  permission  to  other  delegations 
they  ought  not  to  be  astonished  at  this  request.  He  said,  how- 
ever, that  the  position  here  was  a  critical  one  because  while  other 
armed  gatherings  had  been  formed  without  asking  permission  of 
the  administrative  bodies,  this  one  had  done  so.  He  thought 
prudence  would  not  allow  them  to  assume  bad  intentions  on  the 
part  of  the  people  and  that  having  once  accorded  the  privilege  of 
marching  through  the  hall  they  could  not  refuse  it  now.  He  did 
not  think  that  the  citizens  intended  to  send  armed  petitioners 
to  the  king  and  while  he  did  not  believe  that  there  was  any  danger 

that  without  doubt  Roederer  was  fulfilling  his  duty  by  this  address  rather 
than  expressing  his  opinion. 

117  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  296-98.  This  paper  is  called 
the  most  exact  and  the  most  complete  journal  of  the  national  assembly, 
Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  24,  note;  Hatin,  Bibliographie  de 
la  presse  periodique  frangaise. 

26l 


66  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

he  said,  if  there  was,  the  assembly  should  share  it  and  so  asked 
for  a  deputation  of  sixty  members  to  be  sent  to  the  king  to 
remain  till  the  gathering  was  dispersed.118 

Gilbert  then  said  that  he  had  no  doubt  that  the  greater  part 
of  the  citizens  were  well  meaning  but  said  the  fact  that  they  had 
not  obeyed  Petion  whose  patriotism  and  influence  were  well 
known  and  who  had  made  every  effort  this  morning  to  disperse 
the  gathering,  proved  that  there  were  ill-intentioned  ones  among 
them.119  He  supported  Vergniaud's  motion.120 

Thorillon  then  reported  what  has  already  been  noted  above  as 
having  occurred  that  morning  in  the  section  of  the  Gobelins. 
His  speech  brought  out  the  fact  that  the  people  marched  in 
spite  of  the  protestations  of  the  police  and  dragged  cannon  with 
them.121 

Dumolard  rendered  justice  to  the  purity  of  the  sentiments 
which  animated  the  citizens  and  said  he  was  far  from  believing 
that  the  majority  of  them  had  criminal  intentions.  But  he 
thought  that  in  these  critical  circumstances  the  best  of  citizens 
might  become  instruments  of  intrigues  and  manoeuvers  with  which 
the  assembly  was  besieged  every  day.  He  said  the  time  had 
come  when  they  ought  to  place  the  constitution  upon  the  respect- 

118  The  points  in  this  speech  are  supported  by  three  daily  newspapers, 
Moniteur,  XII,  714;  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  299;  Journal 
des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  263;  Three  other  dailies  support  a  few  of 
the  points,  all  agreeing  upon  Vergniaud's  defense  of  the  citizens'  good  in- 
tentions and  his  request  for  a  deputation  to  be  sent  to  the  king.     Chron- 
ique  de  Paris,  No.   174,  p.  690;  Le  patriote  frangais,  No.   1046,   p.  690; 
Annales   patriotiques    et   litteraires,    No.    173,    p.    760;    Proces-verbal    de 
I'assemblee  nationale,  376,  says  Vergniaud  asked  that  the  citizens  should 
present  themselves  before  the  assembly  and  the  king  unarmed  and  that  he 
asked  for  the  deputation  to  the  king. 

119  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  300 ;   Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  264;  Moniteur,  XII,  715. 

120  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale  is  the  only  paper  making  this  direct 
statement,  but  Gilbert's  speech  is  plainly  meant  to  show  the  importance 
of  Vergniaud's  motion. 

121  Ibid.,  XXI,  351;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  264;  The 
Moniteur  does  not  give  Thorillon's  report  of  what  occurred  in  the  fau- 
bourg but  says  the  crowd  refused  to  obey  the  police  and  dragged  cannon. 

262 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  67 

able  basis  of  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  empire;  that  the 
time  had  come  when  they  ought  to  execute  the  law  in  order  to 
teach  the  constituted  authorities  to  execute  it.  He  said  he 
understood  how  the  national  assembly,  led  by  the  example  of  its 
predecessors,  had  up  to  this  time  received  deputations  of  armed 
men  in  its  midst,  but  that  the  law  which  forbade  this  existed 
none  the  less  and  that  past  infractions  could  not  justify  future 
infractions.  He  reminded  the  assembly  that  at  the  beginning  of 
its  sessions  it  had  felt  that  it  would  be  dangerous  to  admit  not 
only  armed  deputations  but  too  large  a  number  of  unarmed  men 
and  for  that  reason  had  passed  a  decree  limiting  the  number  to 
ten.  This  decree  ought  to  be  rigorously  executed  and  it  could 
not  be  if  the  ten  unarmed  persons  presenting  themselves  at  the 
bar  should  be  supported  by  several  thousand  armed  men  out- 
side. He  asked  them  to  remember  that  all  France  had  its  eyes 
turned  upon  them  and  that  ill-intentioned  persons  might  easily 
misinterpret  their  conduct.  "  If,"  he  continued,  "  in  spite  of  the 
decrees  of  the  department  and  of  the  municipality,  in  spite  of 
laws  most  formal  and  most  holy,  in  spite  of  the  excitement  and 
the  disorder  which  reigns  in  a  misled  multitude,  they  should 
penetrate  into  our  midst  and  into  the  chateau,  it  will  be  con- 
cluded that  neither  the  assembly  nor  the  king  are  free.  This 
imputation  would  be  injurious  to  the  citizens  of  Paris.  It  is 
important  to  silence  calumniators.  It  is  important  to  show  to 
our  fellow  citizens  that  the  intrigues  of  aristocrats  and  of  anarch- 
ists are  equally  powerless;  that  the  constitution  will  not  perish 
by  their  efforts,  but  will  triumph  over  all  of  its  enemies."  He  said 
he  was  far  from  resenting  the  motion  of  Vergniaud,  that  on 
the  contrary  it  appeared  essential,  since  it  would  show  a  union 
which  ought  to  exist  between  the  two  powers  for  the  welfare  of 
the  country.  It  is  more  essential  still  to  show  to  all  Europe  that 
the  assembly  is  not  the  dupe  of  a  faction  that  wishes  to  destroy 
the  constitution  and  liberty.  He  then  asked,  first  that  Vergniaud's 
motion  be  put  to  vote  and,  second  that  the  department  of  Paris 
be  asked  to  report  at  the  evening  session  the  measures  it  had 
taken  to  execute  the  law.  This  speech  was  very  often  interrupted 
by  murmurs  or  applause  and  at  the  close  both  were  violent.  Many 

263 


68  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

members  at  once  sprang  to  their  feet  demanding  recognition, 
but  at  this  point  the  president  interrupted  the  debate  by  announc- 
ing a  letter  from  Santerre,  commandant  of  one  of  the  battalions 
of  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine.  A  scene  of  confusion  followed 
in  which  applause,  murmurs  and  cries  within  mingled  with  the 
commotion  from  without.  The  procession  had  reached  the  vicinity 
of  the  assembly  and  was  demanding  admittance.122 

We  have  seen  that  the  two  faubourgs,  Saint-Antoine  and  Saint- 
Marcel,  began  to  gather  at  five  o'clock  in  the  morning,  one  on  the 
boulevard  Salpetriere  and  the  other  near  the  Bastille,  and  that 
they  were  joined  by  cannoneers,  grenadiers,  officers  from  the 
sections  and  commissioners  of  police;  that  they  determined  to 
persist  in  their  purpose  of  marching  to  the  assembly  in  spite  of 
the  efforts  of  the  municipal  officers  to  disperse  them.  We  saw, 
too,  that  Alexandre  gave  the  command  to  march  to  the  assembled 
crowd  in  the  faubourg  Saint-Marcel,  which  proceeded  to  join  the 
inhabitants  of  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine.  Alexandre  tells  us 
that  just  at  the  moment  of  starting,  he  received  the  decree  of  the 
municipal  corps  which  permitted  the  citizens  in  any  dress  and 
with  any  kind  of  arms  to  march  under  the  command  of  the 
officers  of  the  battalion.  He  says  that  the  decree  relieved  him  of 
an  enormous  burden  and  that  under  the  circumstances  he  regarded 
it  as  a  great  benefit.123  The  two  faubourgs  were  separated  by  the 
Seine  and  it  was  necessary  to  cross  either  'by  means  of  ferry 
boats  at  the  place  where  the  present  Austerlitz  bridge  stands  or 
farther  on  at  the  He  Saint-Louis  by  the  Tournelle  and  Marie 
bridges,  or  passage  might  be  made  even  farther  down  the  river 
by  the  bridges  of  the  Cite.  These  last,  Alexandre  tells  us  in  his 
Memoires,  were  guarded  by  troops  under  orders  from  the  court. 
He  decided  to  cross  by  way  of  the  He  Saint-Louis  and  to  his  great 
astonishment  he  arrived  without  obstacle  in  the  midst  of  the 
faubourg  Saint-Antoine  where  he  effected  a  juncture  with  the 
battalions  that  awaited  him.124  The  juncture  was  effected  without 


122  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  301-13;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  264-65;  Moniteur,  XII,  715. 
123 "  Rapport  d'Alexandre." 
324 "  Memoires  d'Alexandre." 

264 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  69 

accident  on  the  site  of  the  Bastille  and  the  united  column  set  out 
directing  its  march  toward  the  national  assembly.125  The  pro- 
cession marched  under  orders  from  Santerre,  "who,"  as  Alex- 
andre  said,  "  was  my  senior  and  whose  second  I  became."126 

Alexandre  continues,  "  The  route  was  long,  but  every  thing 
passed  off  in  an  orderly  way.  No  one  was  insulted  and  almost 
everywhere  people  showed  signs  of  joy  and  satisfaction  by 
applause  and  repeated  acclamations."127  The  line  of  march  fol- 
lowed the  rue  Saint-Antoine  to  the  Place  Bandoyer,  thence  by 
the  rue  Marche  Saint-Jean  it  reached  the  direct  line  of  the  rue 
de  la  Verrerie  and  the  rue  des  Lombards.  From  this  point  by 
the  rue  de  la  Ferronnerie,  it  entered  the  rue  Saint-Honore  which 
it  followed  up  to  a  point  where  a  cross  street  led  to  the  Place 
Vendome.  On  the  left  was  the  monastery  of  the  Feuillants. 
Here  it  halted.128 

The  grounds  and  buildings  in  this  vicinity  have  been  much 
changed  since  1792.  Then  the  space  between  the  garden  of  the 
Tuileries  and  the  rue  Saint-Honore  was  irregularly  covered  by 
the  buildings,  courts  and  passages  of  the  monastery  of  the  Feuil- 
lants. Today  the  rue  de  Rivoli  occupies  the  part  of  this  space 
bordering  on  the  garden  of  the  Tuileries  and  is  separated  from 
it  by  a  grating.  A  cross  street,  Castiglione,  leading  from  this 
grating  to  the  Place  Vendome  has  also  been  cut  out  of  this  space. 
The  part  of  the  rue  de  Rivoli  from  the  former  site  of  the  Tuil- 
eries to  the  rue  Castiglione  formed  then  the  court  of  the  manege. 
This  court  was  separated  from  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants  by  a 
wall  now  replaced  by  the  grating.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the 

125  Rapport  d' Alexandra/' 

128 "  Memoires  d' Alexandre  "  It  will  be  noted  that  for  this  incident — 
the  juncture  of  the  two  faubourgs — we  have  only  the  accounts  of  Alexan- 
dre. In  the  "  Rapport "  he  gives  only  the  general  statement  of  the  union 
being  effected  without  accident  and  o'f  the  procession  starting  out  toward 
the  assembly.  In  the  "  Memoires,"  he  gives  more  details. 

127 "  Rapport  d'Alexandre." 

"  Rapport "  and  "  Memoires "  of  Alexandre.  In  the  "  Rapport  * 
Alexandre  states  that  he  received  the  decree  of  the  municipality  just  as 
the  procession  started  but  in  the  "  Memoires  "  he  says  he  received  it  when 
they  reached  the  rue  Saint-Honore. 

265 


yo  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

manege  and  its  court  extended  between  the  terrace  of  the  Feuil- 
lants  and  the  garden  of  the  Tuileries. 

The  manege  which  had  been  appropriated  for  the  use  of  the 
constitutional  assembly  when  it  was  transferred  from  Versailles 
to  Paris  in  1789,  was  a  building  about  one  hundred  fifty  feet 
long  standing  parallel  to  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants.  Its  long, 
narrow  court  served  as  an  avenue.  It  was  this  court  through 
which  the  procession  would  have  to  pass  in  order  to  reach  the 
chateau.  The  entrance  to  the  manege  could  be  effected  at  either 
end  of  the  building,  but  in  order  to  get  the  procession  out  of  the 
end  leading  to  the  chateau  it  must  enter  the  end  toward  the 
Feuillants.  Since  the  chateau  was  the  objective  point,  it  is  clear 
why  the  leaders  brought  the  procession  up  the  rue  Saint-Honore 
as  far  as  the  Feuillants.  Here  they  could  pass  between  the 
buildings  of  the  Feuillants  and  those  of  the  Capucins  which  stood 
next  to  them.  The  courts  and  the  gardens  of  these  two  monas- 
teries opened  into  each  other.129  About  the  time  that  the  pro- 
cession arrived  at  the  Feuillants  by  the  rue  Saint-Honore,  two 
municipal  officers  whom  Petion  had  sent  to  the  vicinity  of  the 
Tuileries,  Mouchet  and  Boucher-Saint-Sauveur,  learning  that  the 
cortege  was  in  the  rue  Saint-Honore,  proceeded  to  its  head.  They 
described  it  as  being  headed  by  sappers,  national  guards  and 
cannon  and  dragging  with  it  the  wagon  upon  which  the  liberty 
tree  was  placed.  They  asked  the  citizens  what  they  intended  to 
do.  They  received  answer  that  they  were  going  to  the  national 
assembly.  When  the  officers  told  them  that  they  could  not  legally 
enter  in  such  great  numbers,  they  answered  that  they  were  going 
to  ask  permission  and  the  officers  accompanied  the  leaders  to 
the  assembly  door.130 

The  procession  as  it  reached  the  rue  Saint-Honore  is  thus 
described  by  an  eyewitness  who  wrote,  almost  at  the  time,  for  a 
contemporary  newspaper : 

"  The  faubourgs  assembled  upon  the  site  of  the  Bastille,  set  out  in  good 
order  about  ten  o'clock,  the  tables  of  the  rights  of  man  at  their  head, 

129  See  map  of  Paris  in  1792,  Brette,  Histoire  des  edifices  ou  ont  siege  les 
assemblies;  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  33. 

130  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM.  Mouchet  et  Boucher  Saint-Sauveur. 

266 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  71 

placed  between  several  pieces  of  cannon.  They  showed  the  same  honors 
to  the  liberty  tree  which  they  proposed  to  set  up  in  the  garden  of  the 
Tuileries  opposite  the  chateau.  Various  inscriptions  were  borne  aloft  in 
the  procession,  none  of  which  announced  any  dark  designs  of  brigands. 
Here  could  be  read,  '  The  nation,  the  law.'  '  When  the  country  is  in  danger 
all  the  sans-culottes  are  aroused/  '  Long  live  the  national  assembly/ 
'Warning  to  Louis  XVI,  The  people,  weary  of  suffering,  wish  entire 
liberty  or  death/  *  We  wish  only  union,  liberty,  long  live  equality/ 
'  Free  and  sans-culottes,  we  will  preserve  at  least  the  fragments/  '  People 
and  national  guards,  we  are  only  one,  we  wish  to  be  only  one/  When  it 
arrived  at  the  rue  Saint  Honore  the  procession,  which  had  grown  at  each 
step,  was  truly  imposing  and  solemn.  This  crowd  of  people  of  all  condi- 
tions and  in  all  kinds  of  costumes,  armed  as  they  had  been  in  July,  1789, 
with  every  weapon  that  came  to  their  hands,  marched  in  a  disorder  which 
was  only  apparent.  This  was  not  a  mob;  these  were  the  people  of  the  first 
city  of  the  world,  full  of  the  sentiment  of  liberty  and  filled  at  the  same 
time  with  respect  for  the  law  which  they  had  made.  Touching  fraternal 
feeling  and  equality  alone  honored  this  fete  in  which  were  found  pellmell, 
locking  arms  with  each  other,  national  guards  with  their  uniforms  and 
without,  more  than  two  hundred  of  the  oldest  of  the  invalides,  a  great 
number  of  women  and  children  of  all  ages,  and  very  few  epaulets;  but 
red  caps,  all  the  charcoal  burners  and  all  the  market  porters  in  fine  feather. 
Among  the  arms  of  all  kinds  with  which  this  mass  of  men  bristled,  were 
seen  great  boughs,  bouquets  of  flowers  and  ears  of  corn.  An  unrestrained 
joy  animated  this  picture  and  passed  into  the  hearts  of  the  onlookers/'131 

It  was  thus  that  the  people  arrived  at  the  court  of  the  Feuil- 
lants  at  half  past  one  o'clock  and  asked  permission,  through  their 
leader,  Santerre,  to  enter  the  assembly.  As  has  already  been 
said,  the  president  interrupted  the  discussion  to  announce  a  letter 
which  he  had  received  from  the  commandant  of  the  faubourg 
Samt-Antoine,  dated  June  20,  1792,  and  which  read  as  follows: 

"  Mr.  President,  The  inhabitants  of  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine  are 
celebrating  today  the  anniversary  of  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court;  they 
come  to  present  their  homage  to  the  national  assembly.  Their  intentions 
have  been  calumniated;  they  ask  the  honor  of  being  admitted  today  at  the 


m  Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  548-50,  dated  June  16-23,  I7Q2.  A  similar 
description  is  found  in  Courrier  des  83  departements,  IX,  written  by  one 
who  claims  to  have  been  an  eye  witness.  This  account  is  reprinted  in  a 
pamphlet  called,  Recit  general.  Another  briefer  and  evidently  prejudiced 
account,  by  one  who  says  he  saw  the  procession  is  found  in  Correspond- 
ance  politique,  LXIII,  3. 

267 


72  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

bar;  they  will  a  second  time  confound  their  cowardly  detractors,  they 
will  prove  today  that  they  are  the  friends  of  law  and  of  liberty,  the  men 
of  the  I4th  of  July.  I  am  with  respect,  Mr.  President,  your  very  humble 
and  very  obedient  servant.  Santerre,  commandant  of  battalion."132 

The  reading  of  this  letter  called  forth  much  applause  from 
the  assembly  and  the  galleries.  There  was  great  excitement,  and 
amidst  applause,  murmurs  and  cries,  Lasource  finally  got  the 
floor.  He  said  that  he  had  some  information  that  would  quiet 
their  fears;  that  the  orator  of  the  citizens  had  just  been  in  one 
of  the  offices  of  the  assembly  and  had  asked  him  to  say  to  the 
assembly  that  they  had  no  other  object  than  to  present  their 
respectful  homage;  that  they  asked  to  march  before  them;  that 
in  truth  they  had  an  address  to  present  to  the  king  but  that  they 
did  not  intend  to  go  to  the  chateau ;  that  they  wished  to  leave  this 
address  on  the  desk  of  the  assembly  for  it  to  make  use  of  as  it 
saw  fit  and  that  they  would  make  a  formal  agreement  not  to  go 
to  the  chateau. 

Vergniaud  spoke  next.  He  said  he  shared  the  opinion  of  Dumo- 
lard  that  the  constitution  ought  to  be  put  upon  a  firm  basis  and 
the  laws  executed.  He  thought,  if  the  people  had  violated  the 
law,  it  was  because  both  the  constituent  and  the  present  assembly 
had  favored  such  a  violation  by  allowing  similar  gatherings ; 
that  if  they  ordered  the  directory  and  the  municipality  to  execute 
the  law  rigorously  they  would  be  renewing  the  bloody  scenes  of 
the  Champ-de-Mars.  Here  were  heard  applause  from  the  gal- 
leries and  murmurs  from  one  side  of  the  house.  He  continued, 
"  If  you  take  this  action  which  is  not  in  your  hearts,  the  assembly 
will  place  an  ineffaceable  blot  upon  its  history."  [Applause  from 
the  galleries.]  Again  he  pleaded  precedent  for  the  error  of  the 
citizens  and  said  that  they  could  not  believe  that  they  would  be 
denied  admission.  He  insisted  that  since  they  had  been  assured 
of  the  purity  of  the  motives  of  the  citizens  they  could  not  refuse 
them  because — and  this,  he  said,  was  a  very  important  point — 
"the  people  have  been  justly  restless  and  they  wish  to  prove  to 
you  that  whatever  intrigue  or  manoeuver  may  be  used  to  frighten 

U2Ternaux  I,  169;  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  303;  Recit 
general,  10. 

268 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  73 

you  about  their  object,  the  inhabitants  of  the  faubourg  Saint- 
Antoine  will  always  be  the  firmest  defenders  of  the  law."  He 
then  asked  that  these  petitioners  already  assembled  be  allowed  to 
pass  through  their  midst,  but  asked  the  assembly  to  pass  a  decree 
prohibiting  all  future  admission  of  armed  men.  He  closed  with 
the  applause  of  the  galleries  and  a  part  of  the  assembly.133 

Then  there  was  a  real  tumult  in  which  some  members  called 
for  the  question,  others  tried  to  get  the  floor  and  others  accused 
the  president  of  unfairness  in  wishing  to  close  the  discussion. 

Ramond,  member  of  the  Right,  was  allowed  by  a  vote  of  the 
assembly  to  speak.  He  said  Vergniaud  had  alleged  justly  that, 
having  up  to  the  present  time  admitted  armed  men  to  march  be- 
fore it,  the  assembly  could  not  now  refuse  those  who  asked  the 
same  favor,  but  that  he  had  omitted  one  essential  difference  be- 
tween the  present  case  and  former  ones.  He  said  that  up  to  the 
present  time  no  one  had  warned  the  citizens  that  they  were  break- 
ing the  law,  that  no  constituted  authority  had  shown  them  their 
error  and  so  they  had  not  violated  a  law  of  the  realm  and  that 
this  case  was  essentially  different.  Here  murmurs  were  heard. 
But  he  continued  that  he  thought  better  of  the  dispositions  of  the 
citizens  than  Vergniaud  did  and  having  mingled  with  them  since 
the  beginning  of  the  revolution  he  had  a  right  to  speak  of  their  in- 
tentions. He  said  that  when  Vergniaud  feared  that  the  execu- 
tion of  the  law  would  cause  bloodshed  he  did  not  know  to  what 
degree  the  respect  for  law  was  graven  on  the  hearts  of  all  the 
citizens.134 

Here  the  president  interrupted  the  discussion  and  announced 
that  the  commandant  of  the  national  guard  had  informed  him  that 
the  petitioners  to  the  number  of  eight  thousand  were  at  the  door 
and  asked  to  be  admitted.  In  the  tumult  which  this  occasioned, 
Calvet  cried,  "  They  are  eight  thousand  and  we  are  only  seven 

133  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  304;  Journal  des  debats  et  de- 
•crets,  No.  268,  p.  265;  Moniteur,  XII,  715-     All  the  points  in  these  two 
speeches  are   supported  by  these  three  papers   except  the   last  point  in 
Vergniaud's  speech  which  is  not  made  clear  in  the  Journal  de  I'assemblee 
nationale. 

134  Ibid. 

269 


74  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

hundred  and  forty-five ;  I  propose  that  we  suspend  the  session  and 
go  out."135  This  caused  a  still  greater  tumult  and  several  mem- 
bers spoke  at  once.  There  were  cries  for  Ramond  to  continue, 
for  Calvet  to  be  called  to  order.  It  was  said  that  it  would  be 
cowardly  to  adjourn  and  finally  the  president  called  Calvet  to 
order  and  quiet  was  reestablished.  Ramond  then  replied  to  Cal- 
vet, saying,  "  Eight  thousand  men  await  at  your  door  your  decis- 
ion ;  twenty-five  millions  await  it  no  less."136  He  then  continued 
his  speech.  He  said  that  more  than  any  one  he  believed  in  the 
respect  citizens  have  for  the  law ;  he  believed  that  the  legislative 
body  would  fail  in  its  most  sacred  duty  if  it  did  not  warn  them 
of  the  respect  they  owed  to  the  constituted  authorities;  that  the 
legislative  body  was  not  only  the  lawmaker  but  the  teacher  of  the 
people ;  that  it  ought  not  only  to  watch  over  the  constituted  author- 
ities, but  over  the  citizens  who  constituted  them ;  and  that  it  owed 
it  to  the  law,  which  is  the  divinity  of  a  free  people,  to  warn  them 
that  they  were  transgressing  a  law  which  they  had  promulgated. 
He  said  he  did  not  fear  to  see  the  entire  people  around  them  and 
that  the  more  there  were,  the  more  opinions  would  be  enlightened 
by  the  expression  of  the  public  wish;  that  no  one  desired  more 
than  he  to  see  the  citizens  pass  before  them  and  to  see  the  display 
of  arms  which  would  frighten  their  enemies,  but  that  the  assembly 
ought  to  demand  that  those  arms  be  deposited  at  the  door,  else 
their  act  would  take  on  the  character  of  fear.  [Applause  and 
murmurs.]  He  said  he  applauded  the  generous  sentiment  which 
actuated  Vergniaud's  motion  to  send  sixty  members  to  the  Tuile- 
ries  but,  convinced  that  there  was  no  cause  for  fear  in  the  midst 
of  the  people  of  Paris,  he  called  for  the  previous  question.  But 
he  asked  that  the  legislative  body,  faithful  to  its  duty,  present  to 
the  empire  and  to  all  Europe  the  spectacle  of  an  obedient  multi- 
tude. He  then  insisted  on  his  demand  that  the  citizens  deposit 
their  arms  at  the  door  before  they  entered.  [Murmurs  in  the 
galleries  and,  from  the  Left,  some  applause.] 


134  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  305;  Journal  des  debats  et  de- 
crets,  No.  268;  p.  267;  The  Moniteur  gives  the  same  thought  in  different 
words. 

130  Ibid. 

270 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  75 

Gaudet  took  the  floor.  He  said  that  when  the  sections  of  Paris 
had  before  presented  themselves  armed  and  had  asked  the  honor 
of  marching  through  the  hall  they  had  each  time  been  accorded 
the  favor ;  on  this  day  the  citizens  of  the  faubourg  Saint- Antoine 
asked  the  same  favor  [interruption]  but  suddenly  it  was  discov- 
ered that  this  was  a  violation  of  the  law  and  the  demand  was  made 
that  this  seditious  gathering  be  repressed  with  all  the  rigor  of  the 
law.  (Several  voices  cried,  "  Not  true,  not  true.")  He  said  that 
it  seemed  to  him  that  in  the  minds  of  these  gentlemen  the  opinion 
of  Dumolard  did  not  deserve  to  be  refuted,  but  that  he  thought  it 
did.  He  went  on  to  say  that  the  demand  of  Ramond  to  deposit 
their  arms  was  absolutely  impractical  and  based  upon  what?  A 
violation  of  the  decree  of  the  directory  of  the  department  of  Paris. 
How  could  they  speak  of  a  decree  of  the  directory,  when  they 
knew  that  a  former  law  of  the  nation  forbids  the  march  in  arms, 
and  that  the  assembly  has  already  permitted  such  processions. 
[Applause  from  the  galleries.]  It  would  be  a  revolting  injustice 
to  refuse  them.  He  said  this  measure  resembled  that  of  a  Roman 
emperor  who  had  the  laws  written  in  such  small  letters  that  the 
citizens  could  not  read  them  that  he  might  find  many  occasions  for 
punishment.  Here  there  was  violent  agitation  among  the  mem- 
bers and  applause  in  the  galleries.  Some  cried  to  call  Gaudet  to 
order ;  others  called  for  Ramond's  motion,  and  one  member 
shouted  that  those  who  had  brought  the  citizens  here  could  not 
well  send  them  away,  but  Gaudet  added  that  the  assembly  had 
led  the  citizens  into  error  and  had  deceived  them  and  so  he  de- 
manded the  admission  of  the  petitioners.  Many  voices  called  for 
the  question  and  the  galleries  applauded  wildly.  The  assembly 
closed  the  discussion.137 

During  the  debate  the  procession,  led  by  Santerre,  Alexandre 
and  Saint-Huruge,  was  waiting  outside.  It  had  approached  the 
manege  through  the  rue  Saint-Honore,  going  as  far  as  the  gate 
of  the  Feuillants.  There  it  passed  into  the  narrow  court  of 
the  manege  to  the  foot  of  the  stairway  leading  to  the  hall  of  the 


137  Journal  de  I'assemblee  national e,  XXI,  307-10;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  267-69;  Moniteur,  XII,  716. 

271 


76  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

assembly.  The  court  was  separated  from  the  terrace  of  the  Feuil- 
lants  (also  known  as  the  terrace  of  the  Tuileries)  by  a  wall  in 
which  there  was  a  gate.138  This  gate,  leading  to  the  garden  of 
the  Tuileries,  had  been  closed  this  morning  by  orders  from  the 
chateau  and  was  guarded  by  a  detachment  sent  by  Mandat  of  the 
fourth  legion  with  three  pieces  of  cannon.139  The  procession,  led 
by  soldiers,  had  intended  to  pass  through  the  gate  and  plant  the 
maypole  on  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants,  but  on  finding  it  shut 
and  guarded,  that  part  of  the  crowd  which  had  charge  of  the 
wagon  carrying  the  poplar  tree  entered  the  garden  of  the  Capucins 
nearby  and  amused  themselves  by  planting  the  tree  there.140  At 
the  same  time,  the  crowd  in  the  passage  leading  to  the  terrace  of 
the  Feuillants  increased  to  the  point  of  suffocation.  Not  only  was 
this  gate  closed  but  the  one  leading  to  the  assembly  was  also 
closed  and  guarded.  The  head  of  the  column  being  thus  checked 
in  the  passage  and  the  crowd  from  behind  constantly  moving  up, 
the  pressure  became  intolerable.  The  aspect  of  the  cannon 
pointed  at  the  gate  from  within,  the  fact  of  the  gate  being  ordered 
closed  when  it  was  ordinarily  open,  and  the  terrible  pressure 


138  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM.  Mouchet  et  Boucher  Saint-Sauveur ;" 
Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  35. 

'"Copie  du  rapport  du  chef  de  la  quatrieme  legion"  [Mandat]. 

140 Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  35;  "Declaration  de  Larey- 
nie";  Recit  generale,  g.  This  pamphlet  is  an  extract  from  the  Courrier 
des  83  departements,  IX,  by  Gorsas.  He  says  he  saw  the  procession.  He 
makes  an  explanation  of  why  the  liberty  tree  was  planted  in  the  garden 
of  the  Capucins.  He  says  it  was  Santerre's  request  not  to  plant  it  on  the 
terrace  of  the  Tuileries,  because  he  feared  disorder  would  result,  and 
that  he  also  dissuaded  the  people  from  firing  a  cannon  to  announce  the 
planting  and  that  finally  they  consented  to  plant  it  in  the  court  of  the 
Capucins.  Lareynie  in  his  declaration  made  before  the  judge  of  the  peace 
of  the  section  Roi  de  Sicile,  explains  that  the  people  themselves  feared 
that  they  would  be  fired  upon  in  the  garden  of  the  Feuillants  or  the  Tuile- 
ries and  gave  this  as  a  reason  to  Santerre  for  planting  the  maypole  in  the 
garden  of  the  Capucins.  Roederer  sees  in  this  planting  of  the  tree  in  the 
garden  of  the  Capucins,  a  proof  of  the  lack  of  plan,  of  an  object,  of  a 
leader  and  an  absence  of  all  understanding  among  the  participants.  He 
believes  that  the  designing  men  in  the  crowd  hoped  that  an  assassin  would 
be  found  among  them  who  would  attack  the  king. 

272 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  77 

caused  by  the  ever-increasing  crowd  aroused  the  head  of  the 
column  to  a  state  of  fury  and  they  struck  violent  blows  at  the 
gate,  determined  to  break  it  down.141 

Three  municipal  officers,  Boucher-Rene,  Boucher-Saint-Sau- 
veur  and  Mouchet,  who  had  been  sent  to  the  chateau  by  the  mayor, 
were  in  the  garden  of  the  Tuileries  at  this  time  and  seeing  the 
danger  from  the  press  and  hearing  the  blows  and  threats  of  break- 
ing the  gate,  rushed  to  the  head  of  the  procession  to  calm  the 
crowd.  The  people  asked  the  officers  to  open  the  gate.  They  re- 
plied that  they  could  not  give  orders  to  the  chateau,  but  they  would 
go  there  and  try  to  get  an  order  to  have  the  gate  opened.  They  first 
asked  a  commandant  on  the  terrace  who  in  turn  directed  them  to 
the  general  commandant.  But  just  at  this  time  the  noise  redoubled 
and  the  officers  saw  that  a  cannon  had  been  placed  before  the  gate 
and  directed  against  the  citizens.  They  succeeded  in  having  the 
cannon  withdrawn.  They  asked  the  people  to  be  patient  until  they 
returned  and  went  to  the  Tuileries.  On  reaching  the  chateau, 
they  asked  for  Romainvilliers,  the  commandant  of  the  national 
guard,  but  he  could  not  be  found.  They  then  called  for  M.  de 
Wittinghof,  commandant  at  the  Tuileries.  They  were  shown  into 
the  apartments  where  they  said  they  saw  a  large  number  of  people 
clothed  in  black.  These  men,  whose  presence  and  manner  were 
mysterious  and  therefore  a  source  of  irritation  and  suspicion,  were 
the  king's  personal  guards.  The  king  sent  them  away  before 
the  crowd  entered  to  avoid  serious  trouble.142  The  king  appeared. 
He  asked  what  the  situation  in  Paris  was.  Boucher-Rene  re- 


"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM.  Mouchet  et  Boucher  Saint- Sauveur"; 
Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquarnte  jours,  35;  "  Copie  du  rapport  du  chef 
de  la  quatrieme  legion"  [Mandat]. 

142Poullenot  to  Petion,  June  23,  1792,  Archives  nationales  1^4774;  Addi- 
tion to  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet " ;  "  Declaration  de  Jaladon  " 
says  they  came  to  him  to  ask  for  more  guards  for  the  king's  apartment; 
Nouvelle  correspondance  politique,  XII,  9,  says  there  were  150  of  them 
ready  to  form  a  rampart  with  their  bodies  for  the  king.  According  to 
this  newspaper  the  king  feared  a  renewal  of  the  scenes  of  the  2Oth  of  Feb- 
ruary and  to  prevent  it,  sent  them  away.  This  same  statement  is  made 
by  Bourcet,  (Revolution  jranqaise,  XVII,  74).  See  also  Klinckowstrom, 
II,  307- 

2/3 


78  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

plied  that  the  object  of  the  procession  was  to  celebrate  the  anni- 
versary of  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court  and  to  present  a  petition 
to  the  assembly  and  to  his  majesty.  The  king  seemed  astonished 
that  the  magistrate  should  see  so  simple  an  act  in  this  extraordi- 
nary movement  and  recalled  the  decree  of  the  council  and  that  of 
the  directory.  Then  Mouchet  reviewed  the  efforts  that  they  had 
made  since  five  o'clock  to  check  the  uprising  and  assured  the  king 
that  since  they  were  not  able  to  prevent  the  procession  they 
thought  it  best  to  legalize  it  and  assemble  the  people  under  the 
flag;  that  the  municipality  had  also  taken  the  precaution  to  send 
its  members  to  various  places  as  seemed  necessary  and  that  they 
three  were  especially  charged  with  the  chateau.  He  said  it  was 
with  great  anxiety  that  they  had  noticed  that  the  Tuileries,  usually 
open  to  the  public,  had  been  closed  just  as  the  cortege  arrived  and 
that  the  people  in  the  narrow  passage  showed  discontent  at  this. 
He  urged  the  king  to  open  the  gate  saying  that  the  cannon  pointed 
at  the  people  tended  more  to  irritate  than  to  appease  them. 
"Your  duty,"  said  the  king,  "is  to  execute  the  law."  Mouchet 
insisted  that  if  the  gate  of  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants  was  not 
opened  it  would  be  forced.  The  king  then  replied,  "You  ought 
to  execute  the  law.  Come  to  an  understanding  with  the  com- 
mandant of  the  national  guard;  if  you  think  necessary  have  the 
gate  of  the  terrace  of  the  Feuillants  opened  so  that  the  citizens 
may  pass  along  the  terrace  and  go  out  by  the  court  of  the  ecuries. 
See  that  the  public  peace  is  not  violated ;  your  duty  imposes  sur- 
veillance upon  you."  The  officers  rushed  to  carry  the  order  to 
Aclocq  who  was  in  command  of  the  troops  but  by  the  time  they 
reached  the  gate  it  had  been  forced  and  the  crowd  had  filled  the 
garden  of  the  Tuileries.143  Whether  the  gate  was  forced  open 

1 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  MM.  Mouchet  et  Boucher-Saint-Sauveur ;" 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M.  Boucher-Rene ;  "  "  Rapport  du  chef  de  la 
deuxieme  legion  "  [Aclocq]  ;  "  Declaration  de  M.  Genty,  premier  valet  de 
garde-robe  du  roi,"  in  Ternaux,  I,  404;  Terrier  to  the  directory,  report 
of  June  26,  1792.  These  last  two  give  the  text  of  the  king's  order. 
Roederer  (36)  thinks  that  Mouchet  represented  the  mass  of  the  bour- 
geoisie of  Paris  who  feared  the  popular  fury  but  who  feared  even  more 
the  royal  treason  and  so  would  use  the  uprising  of  the  proletariat  to  force 
the  court  to  greater  uprightness  and  fidelity. 

2/4 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  79 

by  a  beam  from  the  railing  or  whether  it  yielded  to  the  pressure 
of  the  crowd  can  not  be  affirmed.144 

While  the  passage  from  the  Feuillants  to  the  Tuileries  was 
being  forced  by  one  part  of  the  crowd  and  while  a  second  had  re- 
lieved the  pressure  by  entering  the  garden  of  the  Capucins,  a 
third  part  was  awaiting,  at  the  door  of  the  assembly,  the  end  of 
the  discussion  on  the  question  of  admitting  them.  As  Gaudet 
finished  his  speech  many  members  were  on  their  feet  asking  for 
recognition.  Suddenly,  a  deputation  appeared  at  the  bar  and  the 
tumult  was  redoubled.  The  president  put  on  his  hat  and  the 
deputation  retired.  He  explained  to  the  assembly  that  this  pre- 
cipitate entrance  was  a  mistake  made  in  a  moment  of  extreme  agi- 
tation and  said  he  would  put  the  question  of  admission  to  a  vote. 
Lacroix  then  explained  that  the  mistake  was  made  by  an  usher 
and  that  when  the  deputation  discovered  its  error  it  retired.  He 
moved  that  the  question  be  put  to  vote  and  the  assembly  amidst 
applause  of  the  galleries  and  one  side,  voted  to  admit  the  deputa- 
tion bearing  the  petition.145  It  was  now  about  two  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon.146 

When  the  column  in  the  court  of  the  Feuillants  received  per- 
mission to  march  through  the  assembly  hall,  the  leaders  recalled 
the  crowds  that  had  entered  the  garden  of  the  Capucins  and  the 
garden  of  the  Tuileries. 

The  deputation  was  led  by  Huguenin  as  its  orator,  who  read 
a  long  and  energetic  petition  which  had  been  prepared,  as  we  have 
seen,  at  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine.147  The  presentation  of  this 


144  J.  J.  Leroux  says  it  was  forced  by  a  beam,  but  the  other  witnesses 
do  not  say  how  it  was  opened. 

145  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  310;  Journal  des  debats  et  de- 
crets,  No.  267,  p.  269;  Moniteur,  XII,  716;  The  Gazette  de  France,  No. 
86,  a  daily  newspaper,  stated,  June  21,  1792,  that  the  necessity  of  the  cir- 
cumstances   («.  e.,  armed  citizens  at  the  door)   was  responsible  for  the 
assembly's  rejection  of  Roederer's  view  as  well  as  the  fact  of  the  major- 
ity's real  feelings  on  the  matter. 

140  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  30. 

141  Ibid.,  30.     Roederer  gives  th'e  name  Huguenin.     Azema    (Revolution 
frangaise,   XXVII,    172),   gives   Enguenet  and   Lenguenet   but  no   other 
sources  give  the  name  of  this  orator.     Roederer  says  he  was  a  man  with- 

2/5 


8o  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

petition  to  the  national  assembly  was  one  of  the  avowed  objects 
of  this  day's  uprising.  A  careful  examination  of  its  contents 
may  serve  to  throw  some  light  upon  the  movement.  "  Legisla- 
tors," began  the  orator,  "  the  French  people  come  today  to  present 
to  you  their  fears  and  their  anxieties.  In  your  midst  they  put 
aside  their  alarms  and  hope  to  find  the  remedy  for  their  ills." 

He  then  referred  to  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court  taken  on  this 
memorable  day  when  the  representatives  swore  not  to  abandon 
the  people's  cause  and  asked  the  assembly  not  to  abandon 
this  afflicted  people.  He  said  the  people  were  stirred  and  were 
ready  to  employ  rigorous  measures  to  avenge  their  outraged  maj- 
esty and  that  they  found  their  justification  in  article  two  of  the 
declaration  of  the  rights  of  man— resistance  to  oppression.  "  But 
what  a  misfortune  for  free  men  who  have  transmitted  all  their 
powers  to  you  to  see  themselves  reduced  to  the  cruel  necessity  of 
washing  their  hands  in  the  blood  of  conspirators.  There  is  no 
more  time  to  dissimulate:  the  plot  is  discovered;  the  hour  has 
arrived.  Blood  will  flow  or  the  tree  of  liberty  which  we  are  going 
to  plant  will  flourish  in  peace." 

He  asked  if  the  enemies  of  the  country  imagined  that  the  men 
of  the  I4th  of  July  were  asleep.  If  so,  their  awakening  would 
be  terrible,  for  the  immortal  declaration  of  the  rights  of  man 
was  too  profoundly  graven  on  their  hearts. 

He  'insisted  that  it  was  time  to  put  article  two  into  execution. 
He  called  upon  them  to  imitate  Cicero,  who  in  open  senate  ex- 
posed the  perfidious  machinations  of  Catiline.  "  You  have  men 
animated  with  the  sacred  fire  of  patriotism:  let  them  speak  and 
let  us  act."  He  said  they  had  always  believed  that  their  union 
was  their  strength  and  that  union  should  exist  essentially  among 
the  legislators,  that  when  discussing  the  interests  of  the  state  the 
legislator's  heart  should  be  single  to  it  and  inaccessible  to  any 
individual  interest.  "Will  this  image  of  the  country — the  only 


out  talent  and  without  ideas.  Neither  is  it  certain  who  drew  the  petition 
up.  L'indicateur,  No.  XXXIII,  a  daily  newspaper  of  the  time,  stated  in 
the  issue  of  June  21,  1792,  that  Lasource  in  concert  with  Brissot  drew 
it  up  but  it  offered  no  proof  and  as  we  have  seen  above  there  is  no  other 
evidence  connecting  these  men  with  the  movement. 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  81 

divinity  that  he  is  permitted  to  worship — find  in  its  temple,  those 
rebellious  to  its  cult?  Let  them  name  themselves  the  friends  of 
arbitrary  power.  Let  them  purge  the  earth  of  liberty.  Let  them 
go  to  Coblenz  to  join  the  emigres.  .  .  .  There  they  can  plot  with- 
out regrets ;  there  they  will  conspire  against  their  country  which 
will  never  fear." 

These,  he  said,  were  the  words  Cicero  spoke  when  he  pressed 
the  traitor  Catiline  to  join  the  camp  of  traitors  to  the  country.  He 
urged  the  assembly  to  execute  the  constitution  and  wish  of  the 
people  who  perish  in  their  defense.  ^He  said  it  was  time  for  the 
French  people  to  show  themselves  worthy  of  the  character  that 
they  had  assumed,  that  they  had  broken  down  prejudice  and 
intended  to  remain  free,  intended  to  deliver  themselves  from 
tyrants  leagued  against  them.  Then  he  added,  "  You  know  the 
tyrants.  Do  not  yield  before  them." 

After  these  preliminaries  of  a  general  nature,  three  causes  for 
complaint  can  be  clearly  distinguished :  first,  the  dismissal  of  the 
patriotic  ministers;  second,  the  inaction  of  the  armies  and  their 
progressive  destruction;  third,  the  inaction  of  the  high  national 
courts. 

Speaking  of  the  dismissal  of  the  ministers,  he  said,  "The 
executive  power  is  not  in  accord  with  you.  We  wish  no  other 
proof  than  the  dismissal  of  the  patriotic  ministers.  Does  the  wel- 
fare of  a  free  people  depend  upon  the  caprice  of  a  king?"  He 
added,  "We  complain  of  the  inaction  of  our  armies.  We  ask 
that  you  seek  the  cause.  If  it  comes  from  the  executive  power, 
let  it  be  annihilated.  The  blood  of  patriots  ought  not  to  flow  to 
satisfy  the  pride  and  ambition  of  the  perfidious  chateau  of  the 
Tuileries.  .  .  .  Shall  we  see  our  armies  perish  gradually?  .  .  . 
If  the  executive  power  does  not  act  there  is  but  one  alternative; 
you  should  assume  it;  one  man  alone  ought  not  to  influence  the 
will  of  twenty-five  million  men.  .  .  .  We  complain,  finally,  of 
the  delays  of  the  high  national  court.  You  have  given  it  the 
sword  of  the  law.  Why  does  it  delay  in  making  it  fall  upon  the 
head  of  criminals?  .  .  .  The  people  were  forced  at  the  crisis  of 
July  14  to  take  this  sword  into  their  own  hands  and  avenge  with 
one  blow  the  outraged  law  and  punish  the  criminals."  He  asked 

277 


82  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

for  the  permanence  of  the  armies  until  the  constitution  should  be 
carried  into  effect.  He  closed  by  saying,  "This  petition  is  not 
only  that  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine,  but 
of  all  sections  of  the  capital  and  of  the  environs  of  Paris.  The 
petitioners  ask  the  honor  of  marching  before  you."148 

The  reading  of  this  petition,  which  has  been  called  "a  veritable 
declaration  of  war  on  royalty,"149  was  frequently  interrupted  by 
applause  and  at  the  close  there  was  applause  from  the  galleries 
and  members  attempted  to  speak,  but  the  president,  Franchise  de 
Nantes,  responded :  "  Citizens,  the  national  assembly  and  the 
people  are  one;  we  desire  your  interests,  your  welfare  and  your 
liberty,  but  we  also  desire  the  law  and  the  constitution.  The 
representatives  of  twenty-four  million  men  assure  you  through 
me  that  we  will  baffle  the  plots  of  conspirators,  that  we  will 
deliver  ourselves  to  the  sword  of  the  law,  but  that  the  laws  alone 
have  the  right  to  avenge  the  nation  and  that  it  is  only  in  them 
that  you  will  find  the  constitution  and  the  liberty  that  you  seek.  The 
assembly  invites  you  in  the  name  of  respect  for  the  laws  and  the 
administrative  bodies,  in  the  name  of  the  country  and  of  liberty, 
which  we  cherish  and  which  we  have  resolved  to  defend  at  the 
peril  of  our  lives,  ...  to  attend  its  session."150  The  petitioners 
crossed  the  hall  amid  applause  of  the  galleries  and  a  part  of  the 
assembly. 

It  was  now  a  question  of  admitting  the  procession.  Dubayet 
tried  to  get  the  floor,  but  the  assembly  refused  to  hear  him.  The 
president  tried  several  times  to  put  the  question,  but  there  were 
protests  from  members  who  did  not  wish  to  admit  the  crowd. 
Finally  Dumas  said,  "  Out  of  respect  for  our  oath  and  for  the 

148  The  identical  text  of  this  petition  is  found  in  the  Moniteur,  XII,  717, 
Revolutions  de  Paris,  XII,  550-52,  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationals,  XXI, 
310-14,  and  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  269. 

149Ternaux,  I,  180. 

180  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  314;  Moniteur,  XII,  717.  The 
Journal  des  debats  et  decrets  is  not  quite  so  full  as  the  first  two.  It  also 
mentions  interruptions  by  some  members  who  did  not  want  the  deputation 
admitted.  But  since  the  first  two  named  are  daily  newspapers  and  there- 
fore probably  independent  and  agree  in  the  fuller  account,  I  have  followed 
them. 

278 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  83 

honor  of  the  national  assembly,  I  ask  for  the  previous  question 
upon  the  admission  of  armed  citizens."  The  assembly  voted  that 
the  citizens  of  the  faubourgs  Saint-Antoine  and  Saint-Marcel  be 
allowed  to  cross  the  hall.  "  Very  well  then,"  cried  Girardin,  "  I 
ask  for  the  previous  question  on  all  the  laws  of  the  realm."151 

But  the  assembly  seemed  to  blow  hot  and  cold  with  the  same 
breath;  while  it  admitted  the  procession,  it  expressed  its  dis- 
approval of  illegal  acts.  For  now  another  deputation  of  two 
battalions  from  the  department  of  the  Gironde,  called  to  the 
frontier  for  the  defense  of  the  country,  presented  itself,  and 
being  admitted  to  the  assembly  read  a  petition  which  has  been 
called  "  the  petition  of  order."152  It  made  no  attack  upon  the 
executive,  but  presented  its  homage  to  the  assembly.  It  expressed 
satisfaction  that  the  time  had  arrived  when  it  could  prove  its 
courage  and  fidelity,  adding,  "  Life  is  not  the  greatest  sacrifice 
for  free  men."  Here  the  assembly  applauded.  The  orator  con- 
tinued, "  Our  oaths  are  dearer  than  life ;  they  are  based  upon  the 
noblest  sentiments  that  can  animate  the  human  heart,  the  love  of 
country  and  of  law.  That  which  we  will  never  forget  is  that  the 
laws  ought  always  to  be  present  in  our  memories  and  dear  to  our 
hearts ;  that  the  military  force  is  essentially  obedient  [great 
applause]  ;  that  whatever  our  rank  none  of  us  should  question 
our  order  before  obeying  it  [applause]  ;  that  in  a  free  country 
every  citizen  from  the  soldier  to  the  general  ought  to  march 
straight  to  the  enemy  without  looking  backward."  [Renewed 
applause.]  The  assembly  voted  that  this  discourse  should  be 
printed,  that  it  should  receive  honorable  mention  in  the  proces- 
verbal  and  that  copies  be  sent  to  the  eighty-three  departments. 
Montant  humorously  suggested  that  a  copy  be  sent  to  Lafayette.153 

The  sound  of  drums  and  music  announced  the  arrival  of  the 


161  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  315;  Moniteur,  XII,  717;  Jour- 
nal des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  272. 

152  Louis  Blanc,  VIII,  60. 

153  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  316;  Moniteur,  XII,  718;  Jour- 
nal des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  273.     Montant's  name  is  given  in  the 
Moniteur  and  in  Le  patriote  frangais,  No.  1046,  p.  690  but  not  in  the  other 
papers. 

279 


84  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

procession.  The  demonstrators  entered,  preceded  by  military 
music.  Santerre  and  Saint-Huruge  directed  their  march  and  they 
crossed  the  hall  to  the  tune  of  Ca  ira.15*  Le  mercure  universel, 
June  21,  1792,  gives  the  following  description  of  the  procession 
as  it  marched  through  the  assembly : 

"  The  petitioners  marched ;  women,  children,  wearing  liberty  caps  and 
carrying  branches  of  trees,  tricolored  ribbons  and  a  banner  upon  which  was 
written :  '  Tyrants,  you  dare  to  drive  out  our  pikes,  return  to  the  law  or 
tremble.'  There  followed  grenadiers,  armed  national  guards,  citizens 
with  pikes,  women  with  sabers;  all  were  intermingled,  fraternally  united, 
presenting  only  a  mass  of  citizens.  In  the  midst  of  these  imposing  groups 
two  tables  of  the  form  of  those  of  Mount  Sinai  were  religiously  sup- 
ported; on  these  was  written  the  sublime  declaration  of  rights.  The 
cries  of  '  Liberty/  the  emblems,  the  caps,  the  ribbons,  and  these  inscrip- 
tions a  thousand  times  repeated :  '  The  constitution !  Live  free  or  die !  The 
constitution  or  death!,'  the  green  branches,  flowers,  applause  redoubled 
without  ceasing,  the  noise  of  military  music,  all  presented  a  sort  of  rare 
spectacle,  where  one  part  of  the  people  dared  to  reclaim  its  rights  against 
those  who  constitutionally  wished  to  enslave  it.  We  shall  not  speak 
of  numerous  and  varied  groups  of  women,  children,  grenadiers,  market 
porters,  charcoal  burners,  priests  with  swords  and  guns,  and  invalides.  We 
shall  say  less  still  of  singular  caricatures  such  as  sans-culottes  held  aloft 
on  pikes.  Nor  shall  we  speak  of  the  caprice  of  arms ;  we  saw  long 
and  very  long  pikes,  forks,  scythes,  axes,  clubs,  great  saws,  large  daggers, 
etc.  But  let  us  say  that  the  flags  of  various  sections  and  this  forest  of 
pikes  and  bayonets  which  filled  the  hall  presented  a  singularity  very  shock- 
ing for  some  people  and  less  disagreeable  for  others.  A  great  banner, 
the  ribbons  held  in  women's  hands,  contained  these  words :  *  Liberty ! 
Tyrants,  tremble ;  the  French  are  armed ! '  On  the  other  side  was  written 
'  Equality..  Reunion  of  the  Faubourgs  Saint-Antoine  and  Saint-Mar- 
ceau.'  Another  banner  bore  these  words :  '  When  the  country  is  in  danger, 
all  the  sans-culottes  are  alert.'  And  on  the  other  side  you  read :  '  Trem- 
ble tyrants,  your  reign  approaches  its  end.'  ": 

As  they  moved  on,  some  danced,  some  shouted,  "  Long  live  the 
patriots!  long  live  the  sans-culottes!  down  with  the  veto!"  In 
the  procession  there  were  carried  two  emblems,  one  a  pair  of  old 
knee  breeches  with  the  inscription,  "  Long  live  the  sans-culottes" 


155  Le  mercure  universal,  June  21,  1792. 

280 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  85 

and  the  other  a  heart  of  a  calf,  marked,  "The  heart  of  an 
aristocrat."156 

The  procession,  which  has  been  estimated  at  twenty  thousand 
people,  occupied  about  one  hour  and  a  half  in  passing,  entering 
by  the  door  of  the  Feuillants  and  going  out  by  the  court  of  the 
manege  at  the  other  end  of  the  building.157  When  it  had  passed, 
Santerre  returned  to  the  bar  of  the  assembly  and  said  that  the 
citizens  of  the  faubourg  Saint-Antoine  offered  their  lives  for  the 
defense  of  the  country  and  presented  a  flag  as  a  mark  of  appre- 
ciation of  the  kindness  shown  thsm.  The  president  accepted  it 
and  the  assembly  adjourned  at  half  past  three  o'clock.158 

On  learning  of  the  march  of  the  multitude,  measures  were 
taken  by  the  commandant  to  guard  the  chateau.  A  number  of 
battalions  arrived  at  the  Tuileries  about  one  o'clock.  Ten  were 
placed  in  the  garden  upon  the  terrace  before  the  chateau,  two 
upon  the  terrace  on  the  side  of  the  river,  five  upon  the  Place  du 
Carrousel,  one  guarding  the  gate  to  prevent  entrance  there,  and 
four  upon  the  Place  Louis  XV  to  guard  the  orangery.  Inside  was 
one  battalion,  the  guard  going  off  duty  and  the  one  relieving,  and 
one  hundred  gendarmes.159 

156  Moniteur,  XII,  718;  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  317;  Jour- 
nal des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  267,  p.  274 ;  a  spectator  in  the  galleries  wrote 
that  this  was  a  most  impressive  scene,  that  every  one  stood  up  and  that 
the  people  showed  a  true  majesty,  Journal  d'une  bourgeoise,  June  20,  1792. 

157  Roederer,    Chronique   de   cinquante   jours,   35 ;    Lettre   de   Ph-Ch-Ai 
Goupilleau,   depute    de   la    Vendee,    Paris,    June   20,    1792,    eleven    p.    m. 
Madame  Tourzelle  ("  Recit  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  a  la  journee  du  20  juin") 
who  was  in  the  chateau  says  the  time  was  two  hours  and  a  quarter. 

158  Journal  de  I'assemblee   nationale,   XXI,  317;   Journal   des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  267,  p.  274;  Moniteur,  XII,  718.     The  Moniteur  says  the  as- 
sembly adjourned  at  four  o'clock  but  the  other  two  papers  say  half  past 
three.     Goupilleau,  a  deputy,  also  says  half  past  three.     "Lettre  de  Gou- 
pilleau," June  20,  1792,  eleven  p.  m. 

159 "  Rapport  que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers ;"  Paroy,  Memoires.  The 
reports  of  officers  on  duty  at  the  Tuileries  show  that  some  attempt  was 
made  by  the  commandant  to  guard  the  premises.  See  reports  of  Perre, 
Aclocq,  Lagarde,  Carle,  Rulhiere,  Lassus,  Leclerc,  Mandat,  Pinon  and  Mus- 
sery.  Bourcet,  an  eye  witness  of  this  scene,  states  that  there  were  also 
cannon  and  guards  placed  on  the  terrace,  Revolution  fran$aise,  XVII,  73 ; 

281 


86  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

The  procession  on  leaving  the  assembly  hall  by  the  door  leading 
into  the  court  of  the  manege,  could  have  retired  by  either  of  two 
routes.  It  could  have  followed  the  long,  narrow  passageway 
leading  out  to  the  rue  Saint-Honore,  or  it  could  have  broken 
through  the  gate  which,  at  the  end  of  the  court,  led  to  the 
garden  of  the  Tuileries,  passed  along  the  fagade  of  the  chateau 
and  out  by  the  gate  of  the  Pont  Royal  to  the  quays  beyond.  It 
chose  the  latter  route.160 

The  crowd  moving  on  to  the  end  of  the  court  of  the  manege 
forced  the  gate  of  the  Dauphin  leading  to  the  terrace  which  ex- 
tended along  the  facade  of  the  chateau.181  Mouchet  was  stationed, 
at  this  gate,  exhorting  the  national  guards  to  remove  their 
bayonets  and  directing  the  march.  He  was  approached  by 
Desmousseaux,  substitute  for  the  procureur  of  the  commune, 
accompanied  by  Cousin,  a  municipal  officer.  Desmousseaux 
asked  him  to  remove  his  scarf,  because  he  thought  he  was  com- 
promising his  official  dignity  by  fraternizing  too  freely  with  the 
crowd.  Mouchet  did  so.162 

Battalions  of  national  guards  were  ranged  along  the  facade  of 
the  Tuileries,  forming  a  military  front,  and  the  crowd  passed  be- 
fore them.  The  march  was  peaceable  and  orderly  and  the  people 
were  joyous.  There  were  some  cries  of  "Long  live  the  nation," 
"  Down  with  the  veto,"  some  gross  expressions  and  some  menaces 
as  they  passed  under  the  king's  window.  These  menaces  did  not, 
however,  represent  the  spirit  of  the  crowd,  but  were  uttered  by 

Goupilleau,  a  deputy,  who  crossed  the  Carrousel  says  there  were  guards 
and  cannon  there.    "  Lettre  de  Ph-Ch-Ai  Goupilleau." 

160  See  map,  Brette,  Histoire  des  edifices  ou  ont  siege  les  assembles,  159; 
also  Roederer,  Chronique  de  cinquante  jours,  38-40. 

161  See  map  as  above  and  Roederer,  40;  "  Rapport  du  chef  de  la  deuxieme 
legion"  [Aclocq.] 

"Declaration  du  sieur  Desmousseaux;"  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M. 
Mouchet."  Mouchet  played  a  very  active  role  on  the  2oth  of  June  accord- 
ing to  many  witnesses.  He  was  popular  and  could  influence  the  crowd. 
He  is  described  as  "  small,  brown  and  bandy-legged,"  "  Declaration  de 
Turot,"  "  Declaration  de  Mussery."  After  the  loth  of  August,  when  he 
played  a  role  at  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  he  disappears  from  history.  He  was 
a  contractor  and  captain  of  grenadiers.  See  L'almanach  royal  de  1792. 

282 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  87 

individuals  who  could  be  easily  counted.163  One  little  incident 
disturbed  the  march  for  a  moment.  A  street  vender  selling  tri- 
colored  bands  with  the  word  constitution  upon  them  dropped  them 
and  for  a  minute  it  was  thought  they  were  thrown  from  the 
window  of  the  chateau.  Through  the  efforts  of  Patris,  a  munic- 
ipal officer,  the  goods  were  restored  to  the  owner  and  the  agita- 
tion subsided.164  As  the  procession  passed  before  the  battalions, 
ranged  on  the  terrace,  some  persons  requested  the  guard  to 
remove  their  bayonets.  Several  did  so  and  others  refused,  all 
probably  acting  according  to  their,  sympathies.165 

Seeing  the  cortege  passing  out  by  the  gate  of  the  Pont  Royal 
to  the  quay  beyond,  it  was  believed,  both  in  the  chateau  and  by 
the  spectators  outside,  that  the  crowd  would  disperse  and  go  to 
their  homes.  So  apparent  did  this  seem  that  some  of  the 
municipal  officers  left  the  scence.  Desmousseaux  went  home  and 
Cousin  went  to  the  Academy  of  Sciences  to  which  he  belonged. 
Champion  took  Borie  and  Leroux  home  with  him  to  dinner.166 

But  the  crowd  instead  of  continuing  its  march  along  the  quay 
of  the  Louvre  stopped  when  it  reached  the  gate  of  the  Louvre, 
called  also  the  gate  of  the  Carrousel.  On  each  side  of  this  large 
gate  there  was  a  small  gate.  These  were  known  as  the  new  gates 
and  the  one  on  the  side  of  the  chateau  was  called  the  Porte 


'"Declaration  du  chef  de  la  sixieme  legion"  [De  La  Chesnaye;] 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M.  Borie;"  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M. 
HU;"  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M.  Patris;"  "Declaration  de  J.  J. 
Leroux."  Leroux,  upon  whose  account  alone  Ternaux  bases  his  statement, 
says  the  cries  were,  "  Long  live  the  sans-culottes  ",  "  Down  with  the  King  ", 
"  Down  with  the  Queen "  and  that  there  were  heard  the  greatest  insults, 
menacing  talk  and  frightful  threats  but  he  is  not  supported  in  this  state- 
ment by  any  other  witness.  Yet  in  addition  to  this  he  says  that  the  great 
mass  of  the  crowd  was  peaceable  and  had  no  bad  intentions.  Leroux  was 
one  of  the  municipal  officers  who  were  not  summoned  to  the  mayor's 
office  early  enough  to  vote  on  the  municipal  decree  of  the  morning  and 
was  not  one  of  the  men  that  Petion  had  officially  sent  to  the  Tuileries. 
His  attitude  is  not  sympathetic  toward  the  crowd. 

1M  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris ;"  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu." 

IBS  «  proces_verbai  dresse  par  Mouchet." 

166 "  Declaration  du  sieur  Desmousseaux;"  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Champion ;"  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Borie ;  "  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Leroux." 

283 


88  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Marigny.  All  three  faced  the  river  and  opened  on  the  Place  du 
Carrousel.  'These  were  guarded  by  detachments  of  the  battalions 
Petits-Peres  and  Petit  Saint-Antoine  under  command  of  Per  re 
and  Mussery  with  orders  to  prevent  armed  citizens  from  enter- 
ing.167 The  guard  at  first  resisted  the  crowd  which  tried  to  enter 
the  gates.  But  when  two  municipal  officers —  the  one  (Mouchet) 
"  little,  brown  and  bandy-legged  " — presented  themselves  at  the 
head  of  a  group  at  the  Porte  Marigny,168  the  guard  allowed  the 
column  to  enter.  Mouchet  insisted  that  they  meant  only  to  cross 
the  Carrousel.169  When  this  group  had  passed,  the  guards  again 
defended  the  entrance  against  the  crowd.  Soon  Hu  and  Patris, 
two  municipal  officers  who  had  been  ordered  to  the  gate  of  the 
Louvre  by  a  superior  officer,  arrived.  They  had  been  told  there 
was  some  trouble  in  the  attempted  execution  of  an  order.  When 
they  asked  him  what  the  order  was,  he  replied,  "  Allow  all  per- 
sons armed,  in  whatever  manner,  to  enter,  but  do  not  admit  any 
unarmed."  This  seemed  an  unreasonable  order  and  directly 
opposed  to  that  which  the  national  guards  had  received,  but  the 
officers  executed  it  and  then  all  entered,  armed  and  unarmed 
alike,  rushing  in  like  a  torrent  in  spite  of  the  national  guards.170 
At  the  beginning  of  the  march  through  the  assembly,  Saint- 
Prix,  commandant  of  the  battalion  Val-de-Grace,  who  we  saw 
was  forced  to  march  with  the  citizens  when  they  set  out  from  the 


L67Lagarde,    "Rapport  de  1'evenement"   etc.;    "Declaration   de   Perre." 
1 "  Proces-verbal  diesse  par  Mouchet" 

'"Declarations  rec.us  par  le  juge  de  la  paix  de  la  section  du  Roi  de 
Sicile,"  signed  by  Turot,  Mussery  and  five  of  Mussery's  subordinates. 
These  men  all  speak  of  the  physical  infirmity  of  Mouchet  and  of  his  being 
so  small  that  his  scarf  dragged  in  the  dust.  Lagard,  Adj.  Gen.  of  the 
4"  -legion  says  that  he  was  small  with  a  spiritless,  thin  face.  "  Rapport 
de  1'evenement." 

170  Same  as  above.  Also  "  Declaration  de  Perre " ;  "  Declaration  du 
sieur  Desmousseaux  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris ;  "  "  Proces-verbal 
dresse  par  Hu;"  "Rapport  du  chef  de  quatrieme  legion"  [Mandat] ; 
Roederer  in  a  report  to  the  department  read  in  the  assembly,  July  6, 
1792,  says  that  the  accusation  that  two  municipal  officers  gave  the  order 
to  admit  all  armed  citizens  is  absurd  and  contradicted  by  the  facts,  His- 
tolre  parhmentaire,  XV,  424.  But  Hu  and  Patris  themselves  say  they 
received  such  an  order  and  executed  it. 

284 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  89 

faubourg  Saint-Marcel,  gave  the  order  to  the  captain  of  can- 
noneers to  go  with  his  two  cannon  and  his  artillerymen  to  the 
Place  du  Carrousel,  which  was  no  part  of  the  royal  courts,  and 
from  there  join  the  procession  upon  the  quay  after  it  had  passed 
out  of  the  Tuileries  garden.  They  had  been  admitted  without 
resistance  into  the  Carrousel.171  Alexandre  had  sent  his  cannon 
to  the  same  place  also,  to  await  in  front  of  the  Hotel  de  Longue- 
ville  the  march  of  the  crowd  through  the  assembly.172  Perhaps 
the  absence  of  these  cannon  induced  the  officers  to  give  the  un- 
usual order  to  allow  all  armed  persons  to  enter  the  Carrousel,  to 
which  reference  has  been  made. 

The  Carrousel  was  soon  filled,  it  being  a  small  place  in  1792, 
and  much  encumbered  with  buildings.  It  bordered  on  the  courts 
which  extended  the  entire  length  of  the  rear  of  the  chateau. 
There  were  three  of  these  courts,  separated  by  walls  seven  or 
eight  feet  high.  The  one  in  the  middle  was  called  the  Cour 
Royale,  that  on  the  side  of  the  river  the  Cour  des  Princes  and 
that  on  the  side  of  the  rue  Saint-Honore  the  Cour  des  Suisses.173 
Sentinels  were  stationed  in  the  watch  towers  of  the  Royal  gate 
about  noon,  with  orders  to  let  no  one  enter  except  by  card  and  to 
allow  no  crowd  to  gather  before  the  gate.  About  an  hour  later  the 
order  was  changed  to  allow  no  one  to  enter  with  or  without  cards. 
At  once,  three  municipal  officers  presented  themselves  at  the  gate 
asking  admission.  The  guards  refused,  but  immediately  some  one 
from  the  chateau  let  them  in.174  The  crowd  seemed  confused, 
but  peaceable  and  showed  no  signs  of  entering  the  chateau. 
They  had  crossed  the  Carrousel  to  the  rue  Saint-Nicaise  as  if  to 
go  out  by  the  rue  Saint-Honore.  Colonel  Rulhiere  who  had  been 
stationel  with  two  squadrons  of  gendarmerie  in  front  of  the 

"  Rapport  de  Saint-Prix  " ;   "  Declaration  de  LaChesneye."     Oelsner 
in  Revue  historique,  LXXXVII,  81. 

1 "  Rapport  d'Alexandre."  The  reports  of  Saint-Prix  and  Alexandre 
indicate  that  the  Hotel  de  Longueville  was  a  general  rendezvous  for 
artillery.  See  also  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet." 

178  See  map  in  Brette,  159;  also,  Berty,  Topographic  historique  du  vieux 
Paris,  I,  280,  and  large  map  at  end  of  volume. 

174 "  Rapport  de  Pierre  Moiteaux  " ;  "  Rapport  de  Jean  Foret " ;  "  Declar- 
ation de  Bron,"  Swiss  guard  at  the  Royal  gate. 

285 


90  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Tuileries  facing  the  Hotel  de  Longueville,  believing  that  the 
danger  was  passed,  dismounted  and  entered  the  Cour  Royale, 
where  he  remained  a  few  minutes  talking  with  another  officer.175 
Suddenly  the  crowd  stopped,  uttered  confused  cries  and  began  a 
movement  toward  the  Cour  Royale,  at  about  one-thirty.  A 
group  of  forty  people  presented  itself  at  the  gate  of  this  court 
demanding  entrance  to  the  chateau.  It  was  opposed  by  the 
guards.  According  to  Marotte,  a  guard  on  horseback,  they  said, 
"We  wish  to  enter  and  we  will  enter;  we  mean  no  harm  to  the 
king  and  no  one  shall  prevent  us  from  going  to  him."176  The 
guards  resisted  and  the  group  retired,  some  making  menacing 
movements  with  guns  or  pikes.  Soon  another  group  presented 
itself,  but  the  guards  closed  the  gate.177 

About  three  o'clock,  the  chief  of  the  second  legion,  Aclocq,  who 
was  in  the  Cour  Royale,  asked  the  municipal  officers,  Mouchet, 
Boucher-Saint-Sauveur  and  Boucher-Rene,  who  had  just  returned 
from  their  audience  with  the  king  and  were  also  in  the  Cour 
Royale,  to  request  the  citizens  in  the  Carrousel  to  delegate  twenty 
persons,  unarmed,  to  present  the  petition  to  the  king.  He 
assured  them  that  they  would  be  well  received  and  that  he  would 
lead  them.  The  officers  stepped  to  the  grating  and  addressed  the 
crowd.  They  urged  them  not  to  enter  the  king's  palace  armed 
and  said  that  the  court  was  a  part  of  the  king's  dwelling.  They 
said  the  king  would  receive  their  petition  in  the  form  prescribed 
by  law.  Let  them  send  twenty  unarmed  petitioners  to  enter 
alone.  The  petitioners  entered  and  the  gate  was  closed.178 

175  Rulhiere,  "  Evenements  de  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792." 

"'"Rapport  de  Louis  Marotte." 

"Rapport  de  Pierre  Moiteaux;"  "Rapport  de  Jean  Foret;"  "Rapport 
de  Louis  Marotte." 

"  Rapport  du  chef  de  la  deuxieme  legion "  [Aclocq] ;  Rulhiere, 
"Evenements  de  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792";  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Mouchet " ;  "  Rapport  de  Pinon  "  ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Boucher- 
Rene  " ;  "  Rapport  de  Lassus " ;  the  evidence  is  not  clear  here.  Lassus 
who  was  guarding  the  gate  says  about  thirty  people  entered  and  his 
troops  closed  the  gate.  Boucher-Rene  says  Saint-Sauveur  closed  the 
gate  but  says  nothing  of  the  deputation  entering.  Aclocq  says  he  led  the 
petitioners  to  the  king.  Pinon  says  Aclocq  and  two  municipal  officers  were 
at  the  door  when  it  was  opened  and  a  group  entered. 

286 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  91 

As  the  gate  closed,  Boucher-Rene  says  he  was  pushed  inside 
and  separated  from  his  colleagues.  Mouchet  outside  now  mingled 
with  the  crowd.  He  heard  cries  and  noticed  a  commotion  at  the 
side  of  the  Hotel  d'Elbeuf.  It  was  reported  that  cannon  were 
pointed  at  the  people.  Mouchet  tells  us  that  he  rushed  to  the 
place  and  assured  the  people  that  this  was  a  false  alarm.  He 
said  the  cannoneers  were  incapable  of  such  a  hostile  act  and  that 
he  had  heard  them  express  very  patriotic  sentiments  and  that  they 
were  devoted  to  the  cause  of  the  people.  He  said  he  would 
guarantee  upon  his  life  that  the  report  was  false.  Thus  the 
people  were  reassured.179  But  there  were  cannon  at  the  door  of 
the  chateau  and  also  at  the  Hotel  de  Longueville  opposite  and 
there  were  chests  of  ammunition  on  the  Carrousel.180 

Romainvilliers  seems  to  have  remained  wholly  inactive  during 
all  this  movement.  His  inactivity  is  attested  by  all  his  subordi- 
nates. He  was  on  the  terrace,  in  the  Carrousel,  or  wherever  the 
crowd  was.  The  chiefs  of  the  legions,  Aclocq,  Mandat  and  Pinon 
and  Vanot,  commandant  of  the  battalion  Saint-Opportune,  either 
could  not  find  him  or,  if  they  found  him,  could  get  no  orders 
from  him.  Nor  could  the  commandant  at  the  Tuileries  get 
orders.181  These  men,  however,  showed  great  activity  in  pre- 
venting entrance  to  the  chateau  and  so  did  some  of  their  sub- 
ordinates, who  were  also  unable  to  get  orders  from  the  com- 
mandant. All  were  equally  powerless  to  enforce  their  own  orders. 
When  Lassus,  a  captain  of  gendarmerie,  asked  his  colonel, 
Rulhiere,  'for  orders,  he  replied,  "  I  have  no  orders,  but  I  believe 
that  the  troops  are  here  to  support  the  national  guard."  Carle, 
a  lieutenant  colonel,  says  he  asked  Romainvilliers  what  he  should 
do  with  his  two  hundred  men.  The  commandant  replied,  "  It 
is  necessary  to  take  away  their  bayonets."  Carle  retorted,  "  Why 
do  you  not  order  me  to  give  up  my  sword  and  my  clothes  ?  "  and 

"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Boucher-Rene;"  "Rapport  de  Lagarde"; 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet." 

180 "  Rapport  de  M.  Lassus  " ;  Poullenot  to  Petion,  June  23, 1792 ;  "  Rapport 
de  Lagarde  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Mussery " ;  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique, 
No.  87,  p.  81. 

181 "  Rapport  de  Aclocq  " ;  "  Rapport  de  Pinon  " ;  "  Rapport  de  Mandat " ; 
"  Proces-verbal  de  Wittinghof,"  Ternaux,  I,  404. 

287 


92  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

the  commandant  said,  "  Take  what  I  say  only  as  an  opinion."182 
Romainvilliers  justified  himself  afterward  by  saying  that  the 
mayor  having  permitted,  and  the  king  not  having  refused  a  request 
for  twenty  unarmed  petitioners  to  enter  the  chateau  and  he  having 
received  this  assurance  from  six  municipal  officers  in  the  garden, 
he  did  not  think  he  ought  to  oppose  their  escorts.183 

Besides  national  guards,  there  were  also  some  regular  troops 
on  the  Carrousel  at  this  time.  These  had  been  ordered  by  the 
commandant  of  war  to  the  Place  Vendome  in  the  morning  to  be 
reviewed.  About  eleven  o'clock  two  detachments  were  led  by 
Wittinghof,  commandant  at  the  Tuileries,  to  the  Carrousel.184 

Within  the  court  there  was  anxiety  among  some  of  the  national 
guards  and  when  the  royal  gate  was  menaced  there  was  a  cry, 
"  To  arms,"  and  the  troops  formed  in  line.185 

This  sudden  movement  toward  the  chateau  seems  to  have  been 
caused  by  the  actions  of  its  leaders.  Saint-Prix,  on  setting  out 
from  the  assembly  where  the  battalion  Val-de-Grace  had  taken 
him  by  force,  attempted  to  rally  his  men  and  to  take  back  from 
the  Carrousel  the  cannon  which  were  ranged  along  the  Hotel  de 
Longueville.  His  cannoneers  refused  to  obey  his  order.  Leclerc, 
the  second  in  command,  repeated  the  order.  Again  they  refused. 
The  battalion  dragged  its  chief  before  the  Carrousel,  and  took  a 
position  near  the  cannon.  Saint-Prix  tried  to  calm  them.  He 
gave  orders  to  the  cannoneer  to  take  the  pieces  in  front  of  the 
column  and  march  back  to  the  Gobelins.  He  refused,  crying, 
"We  will  not  go  away,  we  have  not  come  here  for  nothing,  the 

182  "Rapport  de  Lagarde";  "Rapport  de  Saint-Prix";  Carle,  "  Evene- 
ments  de  la  20  juin,  1792";  "Rapport  de  Lassus." 

' "  Rapport  que  fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers  " ;  Montmorin  writing  to  La 
Marck,  June  21,  (Correspondence,  Mirabeau  et  La  Marck)  says  Romain- 
villiers was  sold  to  a  faction.  There  was  a  good  deal  of  sentiment  against 
Romainvilliers  for  his  inactivity  on  this  occasion.  On  June  28  the  section 
of  the  Tuileries  passed  a  decree  asking  the  national  assembly  to  dismiss 
him  from  service  because  he  had  forfeited  the  public  confidence.  The 
decree  is  found  in  Archives  nationales,  F7459O. 

184 "  Rapport  de  Lassus";  Rulhiere,  "  Evenements  de  la  journee  de  20 
juin,  1792." 

186  "  Declaration  de  Guibout " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  jranqaise,  XVII,  73. 

288 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  93 

Carrousel  is  forced,  the  chateau  must  be  too  ..».,"  and,  pointing 
to  the  chateau,  he  cried  "  Come  with  me,  cannoneers,  straight  to 
the  enemy/'  and  they  planted  the  cannon  in  front  of  the  Royal 
gate.186 

With  this  movement  the  crowd  massed  itself  against  the  Royal 
gate.  The  agitation  became  extreme  and  there  seemed  nothing  to 
do  but  to  fire  the  cannon,  when  some  one  from  within  called, 
"  Do  not  fire,  we  will  open !  "  Immediately  some  one  raised  the 
iron  bolt  that  fastened  the  two  parts  of  the  double  gate  together, 
the  gate  swung  open  and  the  crowd — citizens,  national  guards, 
and  gendarmes — precipitated  itself  madly  into  the  Cour  Royale. 
It  was  a  torrent  impossible  to  check.187  A  spectator  testified  that 
having  once  mingled  with  the  crowd  he  was  carried  on  into  the 
court  in  spite  of  himself.188 

There  remained  still  another  means  of  checking  the  crowd,  but 
again  there  was  a  refusal  to  obey  orders.  At  the  opposite  end 
of  the  court,  under  the  vault  leading  to  the  grand  stairway,  there 
was  another  gate.  The  chiefs  of  the  legion,  Aclocq,  Mandat  and 
Pinon  and  Vanot,  commandant  in  chief  of  the  first  battalion  of 
the  fourth  legion,  requested  the  guards  and  the  cannoneers  to 


"Rapport  de  Saint-Prix";  "Rapport  de  Lassus." 

L8TIt  is  not  clear,  from  the  evidence,  who  opened  the  gate  or  who  gave 
the  order  to  open  it.  No  one  seems  to  be  willing  to  accept  the  responsibil- 
ity of  the  act.  Many  witnesses  outside  simply  say  the  gate  was  opened. 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet";  Carle,  "Evenements  du  20  juin, 
1792";  Rulhiere,  "Evenements  de  la  journee  du  20  juin";  "Rapport  que 
fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers."  Lassus,  "  Rapport  de  Lassus,"  also  outside, 
says  it  was  opened  by  guards  and  Wittinghof,  "  Declaration  de  Witting- 
hof,"  (Ternaux,  I,  404),  outside,  says  Hu  and  Patris  ordered  it  opened. 
This  Patris  emphatically  denies.  See  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris." 
We  have  but  two  witnesses  inside,  Bron,  a  Swiss  guard,  and  Boucher- 
Rene,  municipal  officer.  Bron  says  two  municipal  officers  opened  it, 
Boucher-Rene  says  cannoneers  raised  the  bolt,  and  Roederer  in  his  report 
to  the  department  in  July  says  a  grenadier  raised  it.  It  is  thus  seen  that 
there  is  no  agreement  among  the  witnesses.  According  to  Laporte,  intend- 
ant  of  the  civil  list,  who  made  inquiry  of  all  the  Swiss  guards,  the  Royal 
gate  was  the  only  one  forced,  the  gate  of  the  Princes  and  of  the  Swiss 
not  being  entered.  Laporte  to  Terrier,  Jun.e  27,  1792. 

188  Oelsner,  Revue  historique,  LXXXVII,  81. 

289 


94  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

close  it.  They  were  insulted  and  ill  treated.  Pinon  cried,  "  Are 
you  sure  that  there  will  not  be  some  one  in  the  crowd  capable 
of  attacking  the  king?"  But  the  cannoneers  answered,  "It  is 
better  that  one  man  should  be  killed  than  we."189  The  adjutant 
general  of  the  fourth  legion,  Lagarde,  called  to  his  grenadiers  at 
the  windows  of  the  hall  of  guards,  and  cried,  "  To  arms ! "  but 
they  refused  to  obey  and  passed  out  of  the  building  by  another 
door.190 

The  crowd  advanced  with  such  violence  that  the  cannon  of 
Val-de-Grace  was  carried  on  into  the  chateau  and  up  the  stairs 
as  far  as  the  hall  of  the  Swiss,  but  here  it  was  caught  in  the  door- 
way and  obstructed  the  passage.  The  crowd  became  impatient  and 
furious  when  municipal  officers  (Boucher-Rene  and  Mouchet) 
reproaching  the  cannoneers  for  their  zeal,  ordered  that  the  frame 
be  cut  away  and  the  cannon  was  carried  back  to  the  foot  of  the 
stairs,  where  it  remained  till  the  chateau  was  evacuated.  Boucher- 
Rene  says  he  told  the  people  that  their  violence  would  undo  all 
the  effect  of  their  petition  to  the  king.191  There  was  no  resistance 
now  against  the  crowd,  not  a  man  for  defense,  not  a  national 
guard  at  his  post,  not  a  door  barricaded  or  locked.  The  gend- 
armes in  the  court  remained  quiet  spectators  of  the  invasion  and 
after  the  crowd  had  entered  the  chateau,  the  gendarmes  in  the 
Carrousel  raised  their  hats  on  their  swords  crying,  "  Vive  la 
nation!"™2 

The  crowd  pushed  through  two  apartments  and  to  the  door  of 
the  third  called  the  ceil-de-bceuf.  Aclocq,  chief  of  the  second  legion 
of  national  guards,  says  that  on  seeing  the  situation  he  rushed 
to  the  king's  chamber  by  the  stairway  of  the  Cour  des  Princes, 
at  the  same  time  asking  Boivins,  adjutant  general  of  the  fourth 


"  Rapport  de  Pinon." 
190  Lagarde,  "  Rapport  de  1'evenement." 


91  Saint-Prix,  "  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  dans  le  bataillon  du  Val-de- 
Grace  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Boucher-Rene " ;  "  Proces-verbal 
dresse  par  Mouchet";  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Borie." 

192  Roederer,  45 ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris  " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolu- 
tion frangaise  XVII,  73 ;  "  Deposition  de  Rougeville  " ;  Montmorin  to  La 
Marck  June  21,  1792.  Rougeville  relates  that  at  this  moment  he  met 
Romainvilliers,  pale  and  distracted,  crying,  "  All  is  lost !  we  are  betrayed !" 

250 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  95 

legion,  to  send  help  to  the  apartments.  He  knocked  and,  giving 
his  name,  declared  he  wished  to  stay  by  the  side  of  the  king  and 
save  him.  He  was  admitted.193  At  the  same  time  Bourcet  who, 
by  way  of  another  stairway,  had  rushed  to  the  king,  reached  his 
chamber  with  a  few  national  guards.  They  found  the  king,  the 
queen,  and  the  prince  royal,  Madame  Royale  and  Madame  Eliza- 
beth.19* Aclocq  says  he  hastened  to  the  king,  seized  him  by  the 
waist  and  insisted  that  it  was  necessary  for  him  to  present  himself 
to  the  crowd.  Then,  grasping  his  majesty's  hand,  he  swore  to 
perish  rather  than  see  him  insulted.  The  king  at  once  con- 
sented.195 With  Aclocq  and  Bourcet,  he  passed  to  his  cabinet,  on 
through  his  bed  chamber  and  thence  into  the  ceil-de-bceuf.  He 
was  accompanied  by  Madame  Elizabeth,  who  heroically  refused 
to  leave  her  brother,  and  by  his  three  ministers,  Beaulieu,  Lajard, 
and  Terrier.196  In  the  ceil-de-bceuf  the  king  was  joined  by  Marshal 
Mouchy,  the  gendarmes  D'Hervilly  and  Canolle,  Guinguerlot  and 
Vinfrais,  officers  of  gendarmerie,  LaChesnaye,  the  chief  of  the 
sixth  legion,  and  some  volunteers  of  the  national  guard,  Fontaine, 
Gosse,  Bidaut,  Lecrosnier  and  Guibout.197  The  guards  all  testify 
to  the  little  protection  that  the  king  had.  Aclocq  took  the  king's 


1 "  Rapport  d' Aclocq."  Aclocq  is  much  praised  by  other  witnesses  for 
his  devotion  this  day.  Cf.  Paroy,  Memoires,  298. 

194 "  Rapport  d'Aclocq  " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  73. 

1 "  Rapport  d'Aclocq  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  "  ;  Paroy,  Memoires, 
300.  The  statement  that  Aclocq  told  the  king  that  it  was  necessary  to 
present  himself  to  the  people  is  supported  by  Fontaine.  The  other  evi- 
dence of  demonstrative  affection  is  Aclocq' s,  supported  by  Paroy,  a  friend 
of  the  king  and  queen.  In  the  Archives  nationales  (C  222,  i6o152)  is  a 
letter  from  Bourcet  to  the  king,  dated  July  9,  1792,  recallng  his  devotion. 

196 "Rapport  dAclocq";  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  73; 
"  Declaration  de  Fontaine."  Madame  Elizabeth's  presence  by  the  side  of 
the  king  is  not  mentioned  by  Bourcet,  but  it  is  by  Aclocq  and  Fontaine. 
She  is  likewise  mentioned  in  the  "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier,"  in  the 
"  Declaration  de  Guingerlot,"  and  in  the  "  Deposition  de  Rougeville." 

197  "  Rapport  d'Aclocq  "  ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  -franqaise,  XVII,  73  ; 
"  Declaration  de  Guingerlot " ;  "  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye  " ;  "  Declara- 
tion de  Fontaine;"  "Declaration  de  Lecrosnier";  "Declaration  de 
Bidaut;"  "Declaration  de  Gosse;"  "Declaration  de  Guibout;"  Report 
of  Niquille  and  Gautier  to  the  police  in  the  Archives  nationales,  F74387. 

29I 


96  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

right  arm  and  Bourcet  his  left,  and  remained  with  him  throughout 
his  ordeal.198  Meanwhile  heavy  blows  fell  upon  the  door  from 
without  and  a  panel  was  forced  in.  The  king  cried,  "To  me, 
four  grenadiers  of  the  national  guard !  "199  and  they  rushed  to  his 
side.  A  grenadier  said,  "  Sire,  have  no  fear,"  and  the  king,  heroic 
for  the  first  time  in  his  life,  replied,  "  I  have  no  fear ;  put  your 
hand  upon  my  heart ;  it  is  pure  and  quiet,"  and  taking  the  hand  of 
the  grenadier,  he  put  it  upon  his  breast.200  Gosse  testifies  that 
Madame  Elizabeth,  with  tears  in  her  eyes,  begged  the  grenadiers 
to  save  the  king.201  As  the  tumult  outside  the  door  increased,  the 
guards  and  officers  surrounding  the  king  drew  their  swords  for 
his  defense,  but  Aclocq  ordered  them  to  sheath  their  weapons, 


1 "  Rapport  d' Aclocq  " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  73.  In 
the  year  1816,  two  pamphlets  appeared  written,  by  Joly  and  Drouet  re- 
spectively, in  which  both  say  they  were  guards  with  the  king  on  this 
occasion.  Joly,  Note  historique  sur  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  says  he 
was  on  the  king's  right.  Drouet,  Note  sur  les  evenements  de  la  journee  du 
20  juin,  1792,  says  he  held  the  king's  right  arm  and  that  Joly  was  on  the 
left.  No  other  accounts  mention  these  men  and  their  claims  contradict 
the  contemporary  evidence. 

i9»  K  ]3eC]aration  de  Gosse  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Guingerlot."  The  exact 
words  are  from  Gosse.  The  same  wording  is  found  in  a  letter  written 
June  21,  by  a  former  member  of  the  estates  general  who  was  present  in 
the  king's  apartments.  The  letter  is  unsigned,  quoted  in  Weber,  Memoires, 
II,  170-95.  The  incident  is  mentioned  by  Guingerlot.  The  four  grena- 
diers, Lecrosnier,  Gosse,  Bidaut  and  Guibout,  have  left  their  declarations. 
Another  grenadier  who  was  with  the  king  on  this  day  was  Tupin,  as 
is  seen  by  certificates  of  fidelity  given  him  in  July  by  Aclocq,  Mandat 
and  D'Hervilly  stating  that  he  did  not  leave  the  king's  side  on  this  occa- 
sion. Tupin  used  these  certificates  in  asking  the  king  for  a  position. 
See  the  certificates  in  Archives  nationales,  FT4390. 

200 "  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise, 
XVII,  73 ;  "  Deposition  de  Rougeville  " ;  "  Bulletin  avec  details  sur  ce  qui 
s'est  passe  aux  Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792,"  Klinckowstrom,  II,  303.  A 
pamphlet  of  the  time,  Recit  exact  et  circonstancie  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  au 
chateau  des  Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792,  says  this  grenadier  was  Gosse,  but 
Gosse  does  not  mention  the  incident  in  his  declaration.  The  pamphlet  is 
anonymous,  but  is  an  extract  from  the  Gazette  de  Paris  by  Durosoy.  It 
states  that  it  follows  the  notes  of  an  eye-witness. 

201 "  Declaration  de  Gosse." 

292 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  97 

assuring  them  that  their  zeal  would  only  endanger  the  life  of  the 
king.    They  obeyed  promptly.202 

The  door  was  ordered  opened,  the  bolts  being  drawn  by  a  Swiss 
guard,  and  twenty  or  thirty  people  rushed  in.203  It  is  reported 
that  one  of  the  first  who  entered  was  armed  with  a  sword  blade 
fastened  to  a  pole  and  that  he  tried  to  attack  the  king.  Another 
carried  a  saber  and  a  pistol.204  Aclocq  states  that  he  cried  out, 
"  Citizens,  recognize  your  king,  respect  him ;  the  law  commands 
you  to  do  it.  I  will  perish,  we  will  all  perish  rather  than  allow 
the  least  harm  to  be  done  to  him."  Then  he  says,  "At  these 
words,  uttered  in  a  firm  voice,  the  crowd  stopped."205  One  of  the 
grenadiers,  M.  Cannolle,  cried  out,  "Long  live  the  nation!  Long 
live  the  king!"  but  no  one  answered.206  During  this  pause  of  a 
few  minutes  some  one  proposed  to  the  king  that  he  retire  to  a 
window  recess  where  he  could  avoid  the  crowd  and  where  he 
could  be  better  seen  by  them.  This  he  did  at  once  and  mounted 
a  seat  which  he  kept  until  the  crowd  passed  out.207  Madame 

202  "  Rapport  d' Aclocq  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Guingerlot " ;  Bourcet  in  Rev- 
olution frangaise,  XVII,  73;  others  say  that  the  king  ordered  the  sheath- 
ing of  the  weapons.  Recit  exact  et  cir constancies  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  au 
chateau  des  Tuileries,  20  juin}  1792.  This  pamphlet  claims  to  be  based  on 
the  notes  of  an  eye-witness  who  was  at  the  side  of  the  king.  It  was 
written  after  the  23d  of  June. 

1 "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  " ;  "  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye  " ;  "  Rapport 
d'Aclocq."  Paroy,  who  remained  guard  at  the  king's  door  all  night  after 
this  invasion,  states  (Memoir es,  303)  that  at  daybreak  he  made  a  drawing 
of  the  room  as  it  appeared  at  the  time  the  king  gave  the  order  to  open 
the  door.  The  drawing  has  not  been  found. 

204  "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier." 

105 "  Rapport  d'Aclocq " ;  "  Bulletin  avec  details  sur  ce  qui  s'est  passe 
aux  Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792,"  Klinckowstrom,  II,  303;  Letter  unsigned 
dated  June  21,  quoted  in  Weber,  Memoires,  II,  190. 

206  "  Rapport  d'Aclocq."  Canolle  is  referred  to  as  protecting  the  king  in 
Le  cri  de  la  douleur,  15. 

207 "  Rapport  d'Aclocq " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  fran^aise,  XVII,  73 ; 
"  Declaration  de  Gosse  "  ;  "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier  "  ;  "  Declaration  de 
Fontaine " ;  "  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye " ;  LaChesnaye  is  the  only  one 
of  these  witnesses  who  says  the  king  retired  to  the  window  recess  before 
the  doors  were  ordered  opened.  The  others  give  the  incident  just  after 
the  doors  were  opened. 

293 


98  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Elizabeth  remained  with  the  king.  When  she  was  asked  to  retire 
she  said,  "  I  will  not  leave  the  king."  Aclocq  tells  us  that  since 
the  window  recess  in  which  the  king  sat  was  not  large  enough  for 
both,  he  placed  Madame  Elizabeth  in  a  window  adjoining,  with 
M.  de  Marsilly,  but  she  was  not  able  to  remain  long  and  went  to 
join  the  queen.208  Six  guards  placed  themselves  in  front  of  the 
king  to  protect  him  from  the  pressure  of  the  crowd.  Four  were 
grenadiers,  one  a  cannoneer  and  one  an  officer  of  chasseurs.  The 
devoted  Marshal  Mouchy,  in  spite  of  his  age,  would  not  leave  his 
lord  for  a  moment.209 

The  crowd,  armed  with  guns,  pikes,  clubs  and  sabers,  advanced 
and  soon  filled  the  hall.  Louis  XVI,  calm,  tried  to  speak,  saying, 
"  What  do  you  wish  ?  I  am  your  king.  I  have  never  turned  aside 
from  the  constitution."  One  of  the  guards  at  his  side  testifies 
that  the  king  waved  his  hat  to  the  crowd  crying,  "  Vive  la 
nation!"2™  but  his  voice  was  drowned  in  cries  of,  "Down  with 
the  veto !  Recall  the  patriotic  ministers !  "211 

The  hall  was  literally  filled  with  a  restless  sea  of  heads,  arms, 
guns,  pikes  and  swords.  One  of  the  guards  standing  beside  the 
king  says  that  the  heart  of  a  calf  marked,  "  Heart  of  an  aristo- 
crat," was  carried  aloft  on  the  end  of  a  fork  and  passed  before 

208  "Rapport  d'  Aclocq";  Aclocq  is  the  only  one  of  the  guards  who  says 
that  Madame  Elizabeth  was  placed  in  a  window  recess,  but  Lecrosnier 
and  Gosse  speak  of  her  accompanying  the  king  to  the  deil-de-bceuf.  Guin- 
gerlot  also  says  she  would  not  leave  the  king.  See  "  Declaration  de 
Lecrosnier " ;  "  Declaration  de  Gosse " ;  "  Declaration  de  Guingerlot." 
Fontaine  says  she  was  led  out  of  the  hall  before  the  doors  were  opened. 
Aclocq  is  the  only  guard  who  speaks  of  her  after  the  doors  were  opened. 
His  statement  is  borne  out  by  "  Bulletin  avec  details  sur  de  qui  s'est  passe 
aux  Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792,"  Klinckowstrom,  II,  303.  Madame  Tour- 
zelle,  who  was  with  the  queen,  says  Madame  Elizabeth  soon  came  back. 
See  her  Recit  of  June  22. 

^"Rapport  d' Aclocq";  Bourcet  in  Revolution  jranqaise,  XVII,  73; 
"Declaration  de  Guingerlot."  Among  these  guards  were  Fontaine,  Le- 
crosnier, Gosse,  Bidaut  and  Guibout.  See  their  declarations. 

210  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  " ;  "  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye  " ;  "  Proces- 
verbal  dresse  par  Patris " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  jranqaise,  XVII,  73. 
The  exact  wording  is  that  of  Fontaine. 

id.,  XVII,  73;  "Declaration  de  Guibout." 

294 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  99 

the  eyes  of  the  king.212  As  the  crowd  surged  in,  curious  to  see 
royalty  at  home,  asking,  "  Where  are  they  ?  Where  is  he  ?  Where 
is  she?"  menaces  and  imprecations  were  heard.213  It  was  noted 
by  the  guards  that  one  man  in  the  crowd,  dressed  in  a  green  waist- 
coat, was  one  of  the  executioners  of  I78Q.214  Another  guard 
recognized  Soudin,  one  of  the  besiegers  of  the  Bastille,  armed  with 
gun  and  bayonet,  advancing  toward  the  king  with  threatening 
words  and  manner.215  Still  another  guard  described  an  individual 
about  thirty-six  years  old,  poorly  dressed,  saber  in  hand,  making 
great  efforts  to  reach  the  king  and  using  the  most  abusive  lan- 
guage.216 A  handsome  young  national  guard,  whom  the  king 
recognized  as  having  been  a  member  of  his  body  guard,  addressed 
horrible  insults  to  him.-217  All  these  were  forced  back  by  the 
volunteer  grenadiers  who  formed  a  guard  before  the  king.218 

In  the  midst  of  this  tumult  the  king  remained  remarkably  tran- 
quil, speaking  calmly  to  each  one  who  addressed  him  and  protest- 
ing his  loyalty  to  the  constitution.  It  was  believed  by  many  of 
the  witnesses  that  his  sang-froid  prevented  greater  violence.-219 

212 "  Declaration  de  Guibout " ;  J.  J.  Leroux  in  his  declaration  says  this 
emblem  was  carried  along  the  terrace  and  was  marked,  "  The  heart  of 
M.  Veto."    See  also  support  for  both  of  these  statements  in  "  Rapport  fait 
au  conseil  du  department  par  MM.  Gamier,  Leveillard  et  Demantort." 
"  Declaration  de  Guingerlot " ;  "  Deposition  de  Rougeville." 
' "  Declaration  de  Guibout "  ;  "  Declaration  de  Guingerlot." 
1 "  Declaration  de  Guibout."    Guibout  states  that  Soudin  had  been  driven 
from  the  battalion  Saint-Opportune;  that  he  had,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
revolution,  taken  the  heads  of  Berthier  and  Foulon  at  the  morgue,  washed 
them  in  a  pail  of  water  and  given  them  to  the  people  to  carry  on  pikes. 

210  "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier." 

217  Letter  of  Azema,  deputy  of  L'Aude  to  the  legislative  assembly 
written  at  eleven  o'clock  p.  m.  June  20,  1792.  (Revolution  frangaise, 
XXVII,  172). 

as  This  is  stated  by  the  guards  around  the  king  and  is  also  repeated  by 
the  commissioners  of  the  department  in  their  report  on  the  suspension 
of  Petion.  "  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier, 
Leveillard  et  Demantort." 

219  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  76 ;  "  Extrait  d'une  lettre  ecrite 
de  Paris  en  datte  du  21  juin  a  Dupin  et  fils  a  Montpellier,"  in  Revue  his- 
torique  de  la  revolution  frangaise,  II.,  597;  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique, 
LXXXVII,  80;  Correspondance  secrete  inedite  sur'  Louis  XVI,  Marie 

295 


ioo  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

He  also  showed  anxiety  for  his  family,  making  inquiries  now  and 
then  for  the  queen  and  his  children.220 

An  incident  is  described  here  which  has  'been  often  repeated 
by  writers  since  that  time,  but  for  which  our  only  evidence  is  the 
report  of  the  commission  appointed  'by  the  council  of  the  depart- 
ment to  investigate  the  events  of  the  day.  They  do  not  state  their 
authority.  They  say  that  after  the  tumult  in  the  ceil-de-bceuf  had 
lasted  an  hour  and  none  of  the  officers  could  make  themselves 
heard,  Legendre  advanced  toward  the  monarch  and  the  noise 
ceased.  "  Monsieur,"  he  began,  pausing  as  the  king  showed  sur- 
prise, "  Yes,  monsieur,  hear  us.  You  must  hear  us.  You  are  a 
villain.  You  have  always  deceived  us,  you  deceive  us  still.  But 
take  care!  Your  measure  is  full  and  people  are  weary  of  being 
your  plaything."  Then  he  read  a  petition  full  of  menaces  and 
reproaches,  declaring  that  it  expressed  the  wish  of  the  sovereign 
people  of  whom  he  was  the  orator.  The  king  remained  calm, 
answering,  "  I  will  do  what  the  constitution  and  the  decrees  have 
commanded  me."221  Again  cries  arose,  more  people  constantly 
came  in  and  the  press  became  extreme. 


Antoinette,  la  cour  et  la  mile,  1777-1792,  II,  604;  A  Residence  in  France 
during  the  Years  1792,  1793,  ^794,  1795,  *5;  Lettre  de  Goupilleau,  depute 
de  la  Vendee,"  June  20,  n  p.  m.;  Azema  in  Revolution  franqaise,  XXVII, 
174;  Bulletin  avec  details  sur  ce  qui  s'est  passe  aux  Tuilleries  le  20  juin, 
1792,  Klinckowstrom,  II,  303;  Ibid.,  II,  307. 

220Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  74;  Letter  of  J.  B.  Mosneron 
to  Louis  XVIII,  May  19,  1814,  in  Revue  d'histoire  moderne  et  contempo- 
raine,  XI,  115.  Mosneron  was  a  deputy  and  was  with  the  king. 

"  Rapport  fait  au  conseil  du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier,  Leveillard 
et  Demantort,  commissioners  au  sujet  des  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792." 
This  report  was  made  before  July  6,  1792,  and  recommended  the  suspen- 
sion of  Petion  and  Manuel  and  three  municipal  officers.  Roederer  gives 
the  same  incident,  reproducing  it  from  the  report  of  the  committee  without 
citing  his  source.  The  incident  is  not  found  in  any  depositions,  reports 
or  proccs-verbaux.  Legendre  is  named  by  Lareynie  in  his  declaration 
as  encouraging  Santerre  and  by  the  Nouvelle  correspondance  politique, 
June  22,  XII,  3,  as  being  near  the  king  with  his  friends.  The  Abbe 
Lamar,  "  Les  loisiers  d'un  cure  deplace,"  in  Pieces  sur  la  revolution, 
journees  fameuses,  III,  267,  says  he  was  present  and  calls  him  a  Jacobin 
and  a  deputy.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Jacobin  club  but  was  not  a 

296 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  101 

The  first  municipal  officer  who  came  to  the  king's  relief  was 
Mouchet,  wearing  his  scarf  as  a  badge  of  office.  Raised  on  the 
shoulders  of  two  citizens,  he  approached  the  window  in  which  the 
king  sat.  With  voice  and  gesture  he  strove  to  gain  silence,  but 
his  efforts  were  useless.  He  could  make  himself  heard  only  by 
those  near  by.  The  king  tried  several  times  to  speak,  but  his 
voice  was  lost  in  the  tumult.222  This  situation  lasted  more  than  an 
hour,  during  which  time  the  greatest  confusion  reigned.  Shouts 
were  sent  up  from  the  crowd  and  cries  of  "  Down  with  the  veto !  " 
"  Recall  the  ministers ! "  continued,  while  officers  tried  vainly  to 
make  themselves  heard.223  During  this  period  of  uproar  a  number 
of  incidents  can  be  clearly  distinguished  which  show  the  temper 
of  the  crowd. 

A  man  carrying  a  red  cap  on  the  end  of  a  pole  moved  toward 
the  king.  Several  people  inclined  the  pole  in  his  direction. 
Mouchet  took  the  cap  and  passed  it  on  to  the  king  who  reached  out 
for  it,  took  it  and  put  it  on  his  head.  At  this  strange  spectacle, 
the  crowd  burst  into  applause,  stamping,  clapping  their  hands  and 
crying,  "  Bravo !  "  "  Long  live  the  nation !  "  "  Long  live  liberty !  " 


deputy.  An  unsigned  letter  written  June  21  and  quoted  in  Weber, 
(Memoires,  II,  179)  states  that  Legendre  offered  the  king  the  red  cap. 
The  same  statement  is  found  in  the  Correspondence  politique  of  June 
23,  LXIII,  2,  which  says  Legendre  was  the  national  guard  who  put  the 
red  hat  on  the  king.  It  is  clear  from  all  this  evidence  that  Legendre 
was  present,  but  it  is  not  clear  what  he  did.  He  evidently  did  not  play 
a  prominent  part.  It  is  stated  ("Extrait  d'une  lettre  ecrite  de  Paris  en 
datte  du  21  juin  a  Dupin  et  fils  a  Montpellier  ")  that  the  orator  of  the 
people  said,  "  Sire,  do  you  wish  to  be  our  king  or  not?  If  you  do,  enforce 
the  constitution,  the  execution  of  which  you  alone  have  hindered.  If 
you  do  not,  you  will  be  allowed  to  leave  [France].  We  will  give  you 
forty  thousand  men  to  accompany  you  to  the  frontiers.  We  will  guaran- 
tee you  your  life  until  you  leave  the  realm."  This  is  not  what  Legendre 
is  reported  to  have  said.  It  may  refer  to  the  speech  that  the  "  blond 
young  man"  so  often  referred  to,  made  to  the  king  in  Petion's  presence. 
The  sentiment  is  similar.  See  below. 

222 «  proces_verbai  dresse  par  Mouchet " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  jranqaise,  XVII,  73 ;  "  Declaration  de 
Gosse  "  ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine." 

223 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet";  Bourcet  in  Revolution  fran- 
qaise,  XVII,  73 ;  "  Declaration  de  Guibout." 

297 


IO2  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

and  even,  "  Long  live  the  king !  "22*  A  guard  who  stood  beside 
Louis  XVI  says  that  threats  were  uttered  against  the  king  should 
he  refuse  to  put  the  liberty  cap  on  and  threats  of  returning  daily 
if  he  did  not  sign  the  decrees.  But  a  municipal  officer  who  was 
also  present  states  that  he  did  not  think,  judging  from  the  disposi- 
tion of  the  crowd,  that  if  the  king  had  not  reached  for  the  hat  or 
been  impressed  with  the  idea  of  putting  it  on,  that  it  would  have 
been  forced  upon  him.225  Mouchet  says  that  a  few  minutes  after 
this  incident  the  king  pointed  out  to  him  a  woman  who  held 
a  sword  encircled  with  flowers  and  surmounted  with  ribbons. 
Mouchet  signaled  to  her  and  she  passed  it  on.  He  handed  it  to  the 
king,  who  took  it  and  brandished  it  amid  enthusiastic  cries  of 
"  Long  live  the  nation !  "  The  king  repeated  this  cry.  Then  fol- 
lowed more  cries  for  the  recall  of  the  veto  and  of  the  three 
ministers.226  The  king  made  several  attempts  to  speak,  assuring 
the  crowd  that  he  had  sworn  to  maintain  the  constitution  and 
that  he  was  sincerely  attached  to  it.227 

The  crowd  was  still  pressing  in,  cries  succeeded  cries,  and  the 
heat  was  extreme.  Insulting  language  and  abusive  names  were 
hurled  at  the  king  and  threats  were  made  to  return  daily,  if  he 
did  not  recall  the  veto.228  The  guards  were  continually  forcing; 
back  individuals  who  were  trying  to  reach  the  king.  A  pock- 
marked individual,  wearing  a  brown  frock  coat,  armed  with  pistol 
and  saber,  kept  crying,  "Down  with  the  veto!  To  the  devil 
with  the  veto !  "  Another  man  dressed  as  a  national  guard,  wear- 
ing yellow  epaulets,  and  armed  with  a  gun,  menaced  all  who 


' "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Guibout " ;  "  Decla- 
ration de  Bidaut " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  73.  It  is  inter- 
esting to  note  in  this  connection  that  Joly  and  Drouet,  guards  with  the 
king,  but  who  wrote  their  accounts  twenty-five  years  later,  both  claim  the 
honor  of  having  taken  the  red  hat  from  the  pole  and  handing  it  to  the  king. 
Drouet,  Note  sur  les  evenements  de  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792;  Joly, 
Note  historique  sur  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792. 

"  Declaration  de  Bidaut " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris." 
1 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet." 
227  Ibid.;  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris." 
228Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXVII,  80;  "Declaration  de  Bidaut" 

298 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  103 

opposed  him  and  uttered  insulting  words.229  A  young  man  in  a 
red  waistcoat  constantly  shouted  abusive  words  at  the  king,  re- 
proaching him  bitterly  for  his  conduct.230  A  market  porter,  armed 
with  a  saber,  during  an  hour  made  desperate  efforts  to  reach 
the  side  of  the  king,  but  was  forced  back  by  the  grenadiers.231 
Mouchet,  who  saw  that  this  situation  was  not  leading  to  anything, 
says  he  proposed  to  the  king  that  he  appear  upon  the  terrace  of 
his  apartment  and  speak  to  the  people  where  he  might  be  heard, 
but  those  around  him  opposed  this.  However,  an  order  was  given 
to  open  the  gallery  and  so  evacuate  the  apartment.232 

In  the  halls  and  on  the  stairway  the  crowd  became  more  and 
more  congested.  Municipal  officers  urged  the  people  to  go  no 
farther,  but  to  retire.  Their  efforts  had  no  effect.233 

Presently  Santerre  appeared  in  the  crowd  and  cries  of  "  Down 
with  the  veto!  Recall  the  ministers!  Sanction  the  decrees!" 
greeted  him  from  every  side.  He  tried  to  restore  quiet.234  A  dis- 
interested spectator,  who  stood  near  him,  says  Santerre  cried  out, 
"  What  the  devil  are  you  all  talking  at  once  for  ?  That  is  not  the 
way  to  be  heard.  We  are  not  going  to  leave  here.  Don't  you  hear 
that  the  king  wishes  to  speak  ?  "235  He  then  told  the  king  to  have 
no  fear  and  said  he  would  be  responsible  for  the  royal  family.236 
Oelsner  says  that  his  sans-culotte  eloquence  made  an  impression 
and  there  was  a  moment's  silence  in  which  the  king  spoke  in  a 
firm  voice.  "  I  have  sworn  to  maintain  the  constitution/'  he  said, 
"  I  swear  now  faithfully  to  hold  myself  thereto."  But  the  crowd 

229  Ibid. 

^Oelsner,  loc.  cit.,  LXXXVII,  80. 

231  "  Declaration  de  Bidaut  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier." 
1 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet." 

"  Proces-verbal    dresse   par   Boucher-Rene " ;    "  Proces-verbal    dresse 
par  Borie." 

234 «  proces_verbai  dresse  par  Mouchet " ;  Oelsner  in  Revue  historique, 
LXXXVII,  80. 

235  Ibid. 

38  The  statement  that  Santerre  gave  this  assurance  to  the  king  is  made 
by  Paroy  (Memoires,  301)  and  by  Madame  Tourzelle  ("Recit  de  ce  qui 
s'est  passe  a  la  journee  du  20  juin")  in  Archives  nationales,  C  222,  i6o15a. 
These  persons  both  lived  at  the  Tuileries,  so  their  information  must  have 
come  from  the  royal  family. 

299 


IO4  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

only  mocked  him  with,  "  You  have  often  made  promises  and  failed 
us ;  we  no  longer  believe  you ;  we  want  no  false  oaths.  Withdraw 
the  veto !  Give  us  back  the  patriotic  ministers !  "237 

A  national  guard,  to  whom  a  bottle  of  wine  and  a  glass  had 
been  passed,  seeing  the  king's  discomfort,  offered  him  a  drink. 
"  Sire,"  he  said,  "  you  must  be  thirsty.  .  .  .  Permit  me  to  offer 
you  something.  Fear  nothing,  I  am  an  honest  man  and  you  may 
drink  without  fear — I  will  drink  first,  if  you  will  allow  me."  The 
king  offered  to  drink  from  the  same  glass.  Amidst  applause  of 
the  crowd,  the  king  cried,  "  People  of  Paris,  I  drink  to  your  health 
and  to  that  of  the  French  nation !  "238  But  someone  cried  out,  "'it 
is  not  enough  that  he  fills  himself  at  the  table,  he  must  also  fill 
himself  here !  "  It  was  said  that  under  other  conditions,  it  would 
have  been  considered  greatly  to  the  king's  credit  to  have  drunk 
from  the  same  glass  that  a  man  of  the  people  drank  from,  but 
that  now  the  sans-culottes  considered  such  condescension  as  a 
hypocritical  act  and  contemptible  flattery.239 

The  temper  of  the  crowd  is  plainly  seen  in  an  incident  told  by 
one  of  the  municipal  officers.  On  entering  the  chateau,  he  went 
to  the  apartment  where  the  king  was  and  saw  a  man  held  by  the 
collar  by  five  or  six  other  persons  who  were  going  to  put  him  out. 
On  inquiring,  he  found  that  the  man's  offense  was  simply  that  he 
had  cried,  "  Long  live  the  king  !"240 

337  Oelsner,  loc.  cit.,  LXXXVII,  80. 

238  Lettre  de  Blanc-GUli  au  departement  des  Bouches-du-Rhone;  Bourcet 
in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  73 ;  Oelsner,  loc.  cit.,  LXXXVII,  80;  Aulard, 
Societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  22,  report  made  by  an  eye  witness  in  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Jacobin  club  on  the  evening  of  June  20.  Oelsner  says  he  did 
not  see  the  king  drink,  but  he  saw  the  upturned  bottle  and  heard  the 
crowd  say  that  he  drank.  The  account  given  in  the  Jacobin  Club  was  by 
the  "  blond  young  man  ",  who  addressed  the  king  while  Petion  was  near. 
The  incident  is  frequently  mentioned  by  the  newspapers  and  by  later 
writers.  Recit  general,  June  24;  Nouvelle  correspondance  politique,  June 
22,  XII,  3 ;  Journal  du  peuple,  June  25,  No.  146,  p.  581 ;  Journal  royalist, 
June  24,  No.  5,  p.  5 ;  Correspondance  secrete  inedite  sur  Louis  XVI,  Marie 
Antoinette,  la  cour  et  la  ville,  1777-1792,  Letter  of  June  23,  II,  604. 
Madame  Tourzelle  also  relates  it  in  her  "  Recit "  of  June  22. 

89  This  is  the  observation  of  Oelsner. 
1 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu." 

300 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  i/p<?  105 

At  the  same  time  several  members  of  the  assembly,  who  had 
learned  of  the  invasion  of  the  Tuileries,  appeared  on  the  scene, 
though  not  in  an  official  capacity.  Since  the  assembly  had  not 
adopted  Vergniaud's  motion  to  send  a  permanent  deputation  of 
sixty  members  to  protect  the  king,  Vergniaud  and  Isnard,  two 
of  the  most  popular  members  of  the  Left,  and  Daverhoult  and 
Blanc-Gilli,  two  members  of  the  Right,  upon  their  own  respon- 
sibility entered  the  palace,  forced  their  way  through  the  crowd 
and  came  to  the  king's  relief.241  Daverhoult  reported  to  the 
assembly  that  he  pushed  the  crowd  aside  and  as  he  reached  the 
king,  shouted,  "  You  shall  approach  the  king  only  by  passing  over 
my  dead  body."242  Isnard,  raised  on  the  shoulders  of  two  guards, 
spoke  to  the  crowd  after  silence  had  been  obtained  by  ringing 
a  bell.243  "  Citizens,"  he  cried,  "I  am  Isnard  the  deputy.  If 
what  you  ask  is  granted  at  once,  it  will  be  believed  that  it  was 
gotten  by  force.  In  the  name  of  the  law,  in  the  name  of  the 
national  assembly,  Task  you  to  respect  the  constituted  authorities 
and  retire.  The  national  assembly  will  do  justice.  I  will  con- 
tribute to  that  end  with  all  my  might.  You  shall  have  satis- 
faction; I  will  answer  for  that  with  my  head,  but  retire."  This 
last  phrase  was  repeated  several  times  but  no  one  retired.  How- 
ever, at  Isnard's  words  there  was  a  lull  in  the  tumult.  Vergniaud 
then  spoke,  voicing  the  same  sentiments,  but  with  as  little  success 
as  his  colleague,  and  the  tumult  recommenced.  "  Down  with  the 
veto !  Recall  the  veto  !  Recall  the  ministers  !  "  was  heard  again.244 

241  Reports  of  Dumas,  Isnard,  Lasource,  Turgan,  Arbogast  and  Daver- 
hoult  to  the   assembly,   Journal   de   I'assemblee   nationale,   XXI,   331    ff. ; 
Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  278  ff.;  Moniteur,  XII,  718  ff. 

242  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  269,  p.  295;  Moniteur,  XII,  723, 
reports  that  Daverhoult  said  one  of  his  colleagues  said  this. 

248  Nearly  all  sources  speak  of  the  use  of  the  bell  to  obtain  silence. 
Most  say  an  usher  rang  it,  but  Bourcet  (Revolution  frangaise,  XVII,  77) 
says  the  king  rang  it  and  a  report  of  the  event  given  in  the  Jacobin  Club 
on  the  evening  of  June  20  by  the  young  man  who  addressed  the  king  in 
Petion's  presence  says  the  king  made  use  of  the  bell  several  times. 
Aulard,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  22. 

244 «  proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  "  ;  "  Declaration  de  Gosse  "  ;  Oelsner, 
loc.  cit,  LXXXVII,  80;  Lettre  de  Ph-Ch-Ai  Goupilleau  a  la  societe  popu- 

3OI 


io6  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Goupilleau,  a  Jacobin  member  of  the  assembly,  relates  an 
altercation  that  he  had  at  this  point  with  several  members  of  the 
Right.  These  gentlemen  complained  of  the  people  for  reducing 
the  king  to  such  a  humiliating  situation.  Goupilleau  answered 
that  the  fault  lay  with  the  evil  councillors  of  the  king,  who  had 
prevented  him  from  hearing  the  truth  and  that  they  had  been 
supported  by  the  Right.  Whereupon  the  members  from  the 
Right  said,  "  Only  Jacobins  speak  thus,"  and  Goupilleau  retorted 
that  he  was  proud  to  be  a  Jacobin  and  placed  his  Jacobin  card  in 
his  buttonhole.245 

We  have  seen  that  the  assembly  adjourned  immediately  after 
the  procession  had  left  the  hall  at  about  half  past  three  o'clock. 
The  members,  anxious  about  the  situation,  gradually  returned 
to  the  hall  and  at  about  five  o'clock  a  quorum  had  assembled  and 
they  were  called  to  order.246  It  was  reported  by  a  member  that 
the  life  of  the  king  was  in  danger.  "  I  ask,"  he  cried,  "  that  the 
assembly  go  in  a  body  to  save  him."247  Hebert  requested  that  a 
deputation  of  twenty-four  members  be  sent  at  once  to  the  king, 
but  this  motion  provoked  murmurs  from  one  side.248  Then 

laire  de  Saint-Vincent  de  Nantes;  Isnard's  exact  words  are  taken  from 
Fontaine,  but  in  his  report  to  the  assembly  the  same  evening,  Isnard  re- 
peated the  substance  of  Fontaine's  words  as  the  address  he  made  to  the 
crowd.  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  338;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  283;  Moniteur,  XII,  723.  The  cries  of  the  crowd  are 
reported  in  Gosse,  Fontaine  and  Oelsner.  Isnard  says  that  after  his  speech 
the  crowd  became  more  calm. 

245  Letter  of  Goupilleau  as  above. 

248  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  27,  says  the  meeting  was 
called  to  order  by  Guyton-Morveau  and  that  Girardin  took  the  chair  a 
little  later.  Proces-verbal  de  I'assemblee  nationale  also  states  that  M. 
Guyton,  as  ex-president,  was  in  the  chair.  The  Journal  de  I'assemblee 
nationale  (XXI,  329),  and  the  Moniteur  (XII,  718),  speak  only  of  Gi- 
rardin occupying  the  chair.  Chronique  du  mois,  June  20,  1792,  also  gives 
the  hour  as  five  o'clock. 

247  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets  gives   the  name   of   this   member  as 
Regnault-Beaucaron,  as  does  also  Annales  patriotiques  et  litteraires  de  la 
France,   CLXXIV,  763.     The  Moniteur  and  the  Journal   de   I'assemblee 
nationale  give  no  name. 

248  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  329;  Annals  patriotiques  et 
litteraires  de  la  France,  No.  CLXXIV,  763. 

302 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  107 

Thuriot  said,  "  I  am  far  from  believing  that  the  king  can  be  in 
danger  in  the  midst  of  the  people,  but  if  the  assembly  desires 
a  deputation  to  be  sent  to  him,  I  willingly  consent  to  its  nomina- 
tion." Whereupon  Beugnot  replied,  "  It  is  not,  as  M.  Thuriot  has 
said,  the  people  who  are  with  the  king — these  are  brigands."249 
After  another  angry  retort  by  Thuriot,  the  assembly  closed  the 
discussion.250  It  now  became  a  question  of  the  size  of  the  depu- 
tation. Some  one  asked  that  it  be  composed  of  sixty  members, 
but  it  was  pointed  out  that  if  sixty  members  were  sent  away 
there  would  not  be  a  quorum  left  and  Cambon  said  he  thought  the 
assembly  should  remain  in  permanent  session.  Thuriot,  still 
burning  with  anger,  demanded  that  any  member  who  calumniated 
the  people  should  be  called  to  order,  and  Brunck  cried  out  that 
only  a  factionist  could  see  the  people  in  these  brigands.  The 
assembly  voted  a  deputation  of  twenty-four  members,  the  presi- 
dent, M.  Girardin,  named  them  and  they  at  once  set  out.251 

Scarcely  had  the  deputation  left  the  assembly  hall  when 
Dumas,  who  had  been  at  the  Tuileries,  entered  and  reported  what 
he  had  seen.  He  asked  to  be  heard  upon  a  question  which  con- 
cerned the  public  peace,  the  honor  of  the  national  assembly  and 
the  safety  of  the  hereditary  representative  of  the  French  people. 
He  said  he  believed  it  necessary  to  give  some  executive  power 
to  the  deputies  by  which  they  might  secure  the  liberty  and  safety 
of  the  king,  adding,  "  We  have  seen  the  king  in  imminent  danger." 
This  brought  forth  murmurs  and  protests,  Charlier  crying,  "  The 
king  is  in  the  midst  of  the  French  people;  he  cannot  be  in  any 
danger,"  arid  some  one  retorted,  "  The  people  of  Paris  are  not 
the  French  people."  Dumas,  still  trying  to  speak  above  all  this 
tumult,  demanded  to  be  heard  in  silence.  He  continued  amidst 


249  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  329 ;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  277;  Annales  patriotiques  et  litteraires  de  la  France, 
CLXXIV,  763. 

230  Reports  do  not  agree  on  what  Thuriot  said. 

251  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  330;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  278;  Annales  patriotiques  et  litteraires  de  la  France, 
CLXXIV,  763;  Moniteur,  XII,  718.  The  Moniteur  is  very  brief  here, 
stating  only  the  fact  that  the  deputation  was  sent  when  the  king  was  re- 
ported in  danger. 

303 


io8  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

murmurs,  "  I  have  the  floor ;  I  will  be  heard  in  silence,"  but 
Chabot  cried  out,  "  M.  Dumas  has  calumniated  the  people,"  and 
the  noise  continued.  Dumas,  however,  persisted,  saying,  "  These 
are  not  the  people  who  surround  the  king;  they  are  furious,  mis- 
guided men,"  and  called  to  witness  Isnard  and  Verg-niaud  and 
others  who  had  tried  to  speak  to  the  crowd.  He  proposed  that 
the  assembly  give  orders  to  the  commandant  of  the  national 
guard  to  reestablish  order  in  the  chateau  and  secure  the  safety  of 
the  king.  [Murmurs.]  He  said  it  was  manifest  to  him  and  to 
those  with  him  that  no  orders  were  respected ;  that  the  king  was 
not  in  a  state  of  liberty  where  he  could  give  orders ;  "  He  was 
surrounded,  assailed,  menaced,  degraded  by  the  emblem  of  a 
faction ;  he  had  the  red  cap  on  his  head."  Here  tumult  followed, 
murmurs  in  the  assembly  and  applause  in  the  galleries,  and  voices 
cried,  "The  liberty  cap  is  not  degrading,"  "Call  him  to  order!" 
"  Send  him  tp  the  abbey !"  But  Dumas  continued  to  insist  that 
the  assembly  should  take  necessary  precautions  to  insure  the* 
efficacy  of  the  measures  that  the  deputies  would  have  to  execute. 
He  thought  the  fact  that  the  constituent  assembly  had  charged 
itself  with  answering  to  the  nation  for  the  safety  of  the  royal 
family  on  the  2ist  of  June,  1791,  would  excuse  this  assembly  for 
showing  itself  similarly  affected  by  their  dangers  in  the  month  of 
June,  1792. 

After  several  members  had  attempted  to  speak,  Turgan252  got 
the  floor.  He  reported  what  he  had  seen  at  the  Tuileries  reciting, 
amidst  applause  of  the  galleries,  the  incidents  of  the  king  in  the 
window  recess,  the  red  cap,  the  attempts  of  Mouchet,  Isnard,  and 
Vergniaud  to  speak,  and  the  cries  for  the  sanction  of  the  decrees 
and  the  recall  of  the  patriotic  ministers.  He  said  that  the  deputies 
were  treated  with  the  respect  due  them;  that  having  gone  into 
the  apartments  adjoining  those  of  the  king,  he  had  persuaded 
thirty  thousand  people  to  turn  back.  [Great  applause  in  the 
galleries.]  He  said  he  was  not  opposed  to  action  on  the  part  of 


!52This  name  is  spelled  Turgan  in  the  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets, 
No.  268,  p.  280,  Turgand  in  the  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  332, 
and  Targan  in  the  Moniteur,  XII,  719.  Turgan  is  given  by  Kuscinski,  Les 
deputes  a  I'assemblee  legislative  de  1791,  Paris,  1900. 

304 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  109 

the  assembly,  but  it  should  act  wisely.  He  thought  the  assembly 
should  remain  sitting  until  the  king  was  at  liberty  and  that  it 
should  constantly  keep  in  communication  with  him  through  depu- 
tations sent  to  the  chateau.  Charlier  asked  that  twenty-four  more 
members  be  added  to  the  deputation  and  Lacroix  asked  that  all 
deliberations  be  suspended  until  the  deputation  returned.  Ducos 
thereupon  announced  the  arrival  of  the  deputation  and  asked  that 
no  action  be  taken  until  its  report  had  been  heard. 

Immediately  Granet  de  Toulon  entered  the  hall  and,  as  a  member 
of  the  first  deputation  sent  to  the  chateau,  reported  what  he  had 
seen  and  heard  there.  His  deputation  had  arrived  just  after  the 
appearance  of  the  mayor  and  remained  with  the  king  until  he 
withdrew  to  his  apartments.  At  the  close  of  his  report,  Lacroix 
proposed,  as  an  amendment  to  Charlier's  motion,  that  a  new 
deputation  be  sent  to  the  chateau  every  half  hour  so  that  the 
assembly  might  be  constantly  informed  of  the  state  of  things  at 
the  Tuileries.  This  proposition  was  unanimously  adopted  and 
after  some  objections  as  to  how  the  members  should  be  named, 
the  second  deputation  was  sent  to  the  king.253 

Arbogast,  one  of  the  deputies  who  went  to  the  chateau  when 
the  assembly  adjourned  at  half  past  three  o'clock,  next  reported 
what  he  had  seen  at  the  apartments  of  the  king.  He  said  that 
twenty-four  deputies  were  not  enough  and  proposed  that  another 
deputation  of  twelve  members  be  sent  to  remain  with  the  prince 
royal  and  the  ladies  of  the  court.  This  proposition  was  supported 
by  members  of  the  Right  who  said  the  assembly  was  responsible 
to  the  entire  nation  for  the  safety  of  the  prince.  This  caused  a 
tumult  and  on  a  vote  the  motion  was  rejected.25* 


253  In  this  account  of  the  assembly  the  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets  and 
the  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale  are  full  and  agree  on  the  facts  I  have 
given.    The  Moniteur  is  less  full,  giving  only  the  speeches  of  Dumas  and 
Turgan  (XII,  718).    The  Annales  patriotiques  et  litteraires  de  la  France 
gives  also  a  brief  account  of  the  session.    It  mentions  more  incidents  than 
the  Moniteur  and  gives  short  reports  of  the  speeches  of  Thuriot,  Beugnot 
and  Granet  de  Toulon  (CLXXIV,  763). 

254  Here  the  Moniteur  and  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale  agree.     The 
Journal  des  debats  et  decrets  does  not  mention  the  women  of  the  court. 

305 


no  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Lasource  was  angered  at  the  suggestion  that  the  king  was  in 
danger  and  stated  that  the  fears  for  the  king's  personal  safety 
were  falsely  founded ;  that  the  people  had  been  in  full  possession 
of  the  persons  of  both  the  king  and  the  prince  and  had  done  them 
no  violence ;  and  that  the  deputations  were  sent,  not  to  show  that 
the  assembly  feared  for  the,  king's  safety,  but  to  show  its  interest  in 
him.  He  suggested  that  it  was  an  insult  to  the  French  people 
to  express  fear  for  the  personal  safety  of  the  royal  family.  His 
speech  was  often  interrupted  by  applause  and  murmurs. 

Isnard  now  entered  and  gave  an  account  of  all  that  had 
occurred  in  the  palace  up  to  the  time  of  the  entrance  of  the  first 
deputation.  It  is  clear  from  the  way  in  which  the  reports  were 
received  that  the  Left  was  unwilling  to  admit  that  the  king  was 
in  danger  or  that  he  was  being  insulted.  Any  suggestions  of  the 
kind  were  received  by  them  with  murmurs  and  other  marks  of 
impatience.255 

Meanwhile  the  crowd  in  and  around  the  Tuileries  increased 
constantly.  It  had  grown  much  larger  since  it  left  the  assembly, 
being  swollen  by  onlooking  men,  women  and  children,  all  anxious 
to  see  what  passed  in  the  interior  of  the  chateau.256  Among  the 
throng  in  the  garden  of  the  Tuileries  one  observer  noticed  an 
individual  attired  in  light  blue  with  white  embroidered  waistcoat 
and  curled  and  powdered  hair.  It  was  Manuel,  the  procureur  de 

255  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  281  ff. ;  Journal  de  I'assemblee 
nationale,  XXI,  335  ff. ;  Moniteur,  XII,  719. 

256  Isnard  in  his  report  to  the  assembly,  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale, 
XXI,  337;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  283;  Moniteur,  XII, 
719.    Turgan,  in  the  same  meeting,  reported  that  he  turned  thirty  thousand 
people  back  on  the  stairway.    Four  different  accounts  written  by  eye  wit- 
nesses but  unsigned  estimate  the  crowd  in  and  around  the  Tuileries  at 
twenty,  thirty,  forty  and  fifty  thousand.    Klinckowstrom,  II,  307;  "  Extrait 
d'une  lettre  ecrite  de  Paris  en  datte  du  21  juin  a  Dupin  et  fils  a  Mont- 
pellier,"  in  Revue  historique  de  la  revolution  franqaise,  II,  597;  Letter 
unsigned  quoted  in  Weber,  Memoires,  II,  187;   Klinckowstrom,  II,  303. 
Inside  the  chateau  the  crowd  is  estimated  by  two  witnesses  at  two  thou- 
sand and  seven  or  eight  thousand.    Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII, 
75,  and  Wittinghof  in  his  declaration  before  the  justice  of  the  peace  quoted 
in  Ternaux,  I,  404. 

306 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  m 

la  commune.     He  passed  an  hour  in  the  garden,  but  not  in  an 
official  capacity.257 

At  about  half  past  five  o'clock,  or  a  little  earlier,  when  the 
invasion  of  the  chateau  had  lasted  about  two  hours,  and  after 
municipal  officers  and  deputies  from  the  assembly  had  tried  in 
vain  to  restore  order,  the  mayor  of  Paris,  Petion,  was  an- 
nounced.258 He  had  not  joined  the  procession  and  he  had  not 


"Declaration  de  Maserey";  Letter  of  Roederer  to  the  commissioners 
of  the  department,  June  30,  1792.  These  men,  Gamier,  Leveillard  and 
Demantort  were  appointed  to  make  a  report  on  the  events  of  the  day  of 
June  20.  They  wrote  Roederer  June  30,  their  second  request,  to  get  from 
Manuel  a  report  of  his  conduct  on  June  20.  Roederer  wrote  Manuel  on 
the  same  day  making  a  second  request  for  his  report.  He  received  answer 
from  Manuel  (according  to  Roederer's  letter  to  the  commissioners)  say- 
ing that  Manuel  had  spent  one  hour  at  the  Tuileries  June  20.  Manuel's 
letter  is  not  given  by  Roederer.  See  this  correspondence  in  Revue  retro- 
spective, 2  serie,  I,  203-04.  Manuel  stated  to  Roederer  that  his  place  was 
at  the  city  hall  on  that  day.  Desmouseaux,  substitute  for  the  procureur 
de  la  commune,  states  that  Manuel  was  at  his  post  at  the  Hotel  de  Ville  at 
nine  a.  m.,  June  20,  "  Declaration  de  Desmouseaux."  Manuel  was  sus- 
pended from  his  functions  by  a  decree  of  the  council  of  the  department, 
July  6,  1792,  at  the  same  time  Petion  was  suspended.  In  Archives 
nationales,  C  222,  i6o152,  there  is  found  a  handbill  accusing  Manuel  of 
improper  remarks  concerning  the  national  guard  on  this  day. 

158  The  statements  about  the  time  of  Petion' s  arrival  do  not  perfectly 
agree.  Fontaine,  a  guard  beside  the  king,  says  ("Declaration  de  Fon- 
taine") it  was  fifteen  minutes  after  five.  Petion  himself  ("  Conduite 
tenue  par  M.  le  maire")  says  he  reached  the  chateau  a  little  before  five 
o'clock.  Allowing  a  little  time  for  him  to  make  his  way  through  the 
crowd  to  the  king,  these  statements  agree.  Another  guard,  Hemery,  says 
it  was  between  five  and  six  o'clock;  a  deputy,  Lesier,  says  it  was  about 
six  o'clock;  Becquey,  another  deputy,  says  it  was  two  hours  after  the  vol- 
untary deputation  from  the  assembly  arrived.  This  deputation  came  to  the 
chateau  immediately  after  the  assembly  adjourned  at  three- thirty.  This 
would  put  the  arrival  of  the  mayor  at  five-thirty.  Another  means  of  fixing 
the  time  is  by  the  arrival  of  the  first  deputation  sent  by  the  assembly.  The 
assembly  met  at  five  o'clock  and  after  a  ten  or  fifteen  minute  discussion 
sent  a  deputation  of  twenty-four  members  to  the  king.  Allowing  time  for 
them  to  penetrate  the  crowd  they  would  reach  the  king  about  five-thirty. 
Gosse,  a  guard  at  the  king's  side,  says  ("Declaration  de  Gosse")  Petion 
arrived  just  after  the  deputation;  Fontaine,  a  guard,  says  ("Declaration 
de  Fontaine")  he  arrived  just  before  the  deputation;  Champion,  a munici- 

307 


H2  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer     , 

been  seen  in  public  since  about  eleven  o'clock  in  the  morning, 
when  the  decree  legalizing  the  procession  had  been  passed  by 
the  municipality.  Petion  tells  us  that  he  remained  at  the  city 
hall  until  half  past  two  o'clock  and  then  he  went  to  the  hall  of 
the  mayoralty.  Here  he  received  reports  from  the  chateau  through 
municipal  officers.259  He  had  given  no  orders  looking  toward 
the  safety  of  either  the  assembly  or  the  Tuileries.  Two  letters 
written  during  the  day,  one  from  the  directory  of  the  department 
and  one  from  three  members  of  the  council  of  the  commune, 
show  that  these  constituted  authorities  were  very  uneasy.  The 
letter  from  the  directory  was  addressed  to  the  municipality  and 
asked  for  a  municipal  officer  to  give  them  information.  The  other 
letter  was  addressed  to  the  mayor  at  half  past  four  o'clock  and 
signed  by  three  members  of  the  council  of  the  commune,  who  had 
assembled  at  the  city  hall.  They  urged  the  mayor  to  send  them 
instructions.260  Petion  did  not  leave  the  city  hall  until  half  past 


pal  officer  who  helped  clear  the  apartments,  says  ("  Proces-verbal  de 
Champion")  Petion  arrived  just  before  the  deputation;  and  Blanc-Gilli, 
a  deputy  who  had  been  in  the  room  since  the  entrance  of  the  crowd,  says 
("Lettre  d'un  depute  de  1'assemblee  nationale")  that  Petion  arrived  at 
the  same  time  as  the  deputation  of  twenty- four;  Borie  states  (''Proces- 
verbal  dresse  par  Borie")  that  he  and  his  colleagues,  Champion  and 
Leroux  arrived  at  the  chateau  at  five-thirty.  These  met  the  mayor  on  the 
stairway.  ("Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu.")  Still  another  way  of  fixing 
the  time  remains.  The  king  said  to  Petion  on  his  arrival  (see  reference 
below)  that  the  invasion  had  lasted  two  hours  and  Azema,  a  deputy  who 
was  present,  also  says  ("  Lettre  d' Azema,"  in  Revolution  jranqaise, 
XXVII,  173)  that  the  king  endured  this  noise  two  hours.  This  again 
points  to  the  time  of  Petion's  arrival  as  about  five-thirty. 

1 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Ser- 
gent."  Sergent  was  at  the  mayoralty  until  three  o'clock  when  he  set  out 
for  the  purpose  of  getting  information.  He  returned  at  four  o'clock  with 
a  report  that  he  had  heard  it  said  that  the  people  had  entered  the  king's 
apartments. 

!60This  letter  states  that  the  three  men  who  signed  it  had  gone  to  the 
city  hall  in  response  to  a  notice  that  each  had  received  which  read, 
"  The  peril  is  urgent ;  quick  to  the  Hotel  de  Ville."  They  ask  Petion  if 
this  is  his  order  and  whether  or  not  the  council  will  meet  today.  Both 
letters  are  printed  in  Ternaux,  I,  208,  note  I.  Petion  did  not  answer  these 
letters  but  at  some  time  during  the  day  he  took  time  to  write  a  letter  to 

308 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  113 

four  or  a  quarter  before  five  o'clock,  when  he  says  he  first  learned 
through  an  adjutant  that  the  Tuileries  had  been  invaded.281  He 
set  out  at  once,  without  finishing  his  dinner,  and  drove  in  his  car- 
riage to  the  chateau.262  He  took  with  him  his  secretary  Joseau 
and  the  administrator  of  police,  Sergent.  They  descended  at  the 
Cour  des  Princes,  the  door  of  which  they  had  reached  with  great 
difficulty,  and  putting  on  their  scarfs,  tried  to  open  a  passage 
through  the  crowd.  They  found  everything  much  obstructed.283 
Here  they  were  joined  by  Mouchet  and  Hu,  municipal  officers, 
who  accompanied  them  to  the  apartments  of  the  king.264 

Mouchet  had  all  the  afternoon  made  the  greatest  efforts  to 
keep  the  people  quiet.  He  had  been  at  every  door  that  the  crowd 
passed  through,  had  stood  beside  the  king  for  an  hour,  and  finally, 
wrearied  by  his  fruitless  efforts  to  clear  the  chateau,  says  he  had 
gone  out  an  hour  before  to  get  refreshments.  Hu  had  also  been 
out  of  the  chateau  for  two  hours,  he  tells  us,  to  assist  in  rendering 
justice  to  several  men  who  had  been  arrested  at  the  chateau  and 
carried  to  the  police  station  near  by.-265 

The  progress  of  the  municipal  officers  to  the  royal  apartments 
was  slow,  the  crowd  being  so  dense  that  it  was  necessary  to 
address  them  and  urge  them  to  make  room.  Petion  reminded 


the  president  of  the  committee  of  surveillance  of  the  national  assembly 
calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  he  had  been  informed  of  disturbances 
occurring  in  the  south  of  France.  Archives  nationales,  FT,  4590. 

261  The  note  signed  by  three  members  of  the  council,  Aug.  de  Bourge 
(notable),  J.  Hirmet,  and  Marie,  asking  for  instructions  because  the 
danger  was  pressing,  is  dated  at  four-thirty  p.  m.  (Ternaux,  I,  208).  If 
this  was  Petion' s  first  information  of  the  invasion  of  the  chateau  then  he 
acted  on  the  information  as  soon  as  he  could.  But  Sergent  in  his 
proces-verbal  states  that  he  returned  to  the  mayoralty  at  four  o'clock  and 
had  heard  it  said  that  the  people  filled  the  chateau  from  top  to  bottom. 
He  must  have  told  Petion  this  because  he  left  the  mayoralty  at  three  o'clock 
to  get  information.  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent." 

262 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

zes « proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le 
maire." 

264  Mouchet  refers  to  this  court  as  the  Cour  Royale.  The  two  courts 
were  separated  by  a  wall. 

"Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet";  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu." 

309 


H4  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

them  of  the  dignity  that  ought  to  be  maintained  by  men  who 
wished  to  remain  free  and  who  wished  to  preserve  their  consti- 
tution. This  brought  great  applause.  He  urged  them  to  guard 
against  ill-intentioned  persons  who  might  slip  into  their  midst  and 
incite  to  disorder  and  so  caluminate  the  people  and  their  magis- 
trates. Passing  on  up  the  stairway,  several  persons  asked  him 
if  the  king  had  withdrawn  his  vetoes  and  recalled  the  ministers. 
He  stopped  and  vehemently  said  that  the  will  of  the  king  must 
be  free  and  not  forced  and  that  the  people  could  only  prove  its 
cause  by  moderation.  He  urged  them  to  retire  peaceably.  All 
his  words  were  greeted  by  applause.266 

Reaching  the  ceil-de-bceuf,  Petion  and  Sergent  saw  the  king 
surrounded  by  several  officers  of  the  national  guard,  two  chiefs 
of  the  legion,  Aclocque  and  LaChesnaye,  two  deputies  from  the 
assembly,  Isnard  and  Vergniaud,  and  some  municipal  officers  in 
scarfs,  Patris,  Vigner,  Champion  and  others.267  Louis  XVI  still 
wore  the  red  cap  and  Petion  later  referred  to  him  as  "  covered  by 
the  emblem  of  liberty."268  Raised  on  the  shoulders  of  several 
citizens,  Petion  pushed  his  way  to  the  king  amidst  great  applause. 
"Long  live  Petion!"  shouted  the  crowd.269  "Sire,  I  have  just 
this  instant  learned  the  situation  you  are  in,"  said  the  mayor.  To 
this  the  king  replied,  "That  is  astonishing.  This  has  lasted  two 


; "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet";  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Ser- 
gent " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu " ;  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le 
maire." 

vn  t<  proces_verbai  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Mouchet " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Leroux " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Champion."  Champion,  Borie  and 
Leroux  had  been  to  dinner  at  the  home  of  Champion  and  returned  to  the 
chateau  just  as  Petion  arrived.  They  followed  by  the  same  way  that  the 
mayor  took.  Hu,  who  was  with  Petion,  speaks  of  seeing  Borie  and 
Leroux  on  the  stairs.  Champion  soon  reached  the  room  where  he  found 
the  mayor  with  the  king.  See  the  proces-verbaux  of  Champion,  Borie, 
Leroux  and  Hu. 

1 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire." 

269Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXVII,  82;  Aulard,  Societe  des 
Jacobins,  IV,  22,  report  given  in  the  Jacobin  Club,  June  20,  1792;  "Dec- 
laration de  Lesieur,"  Ternaux,  I,  406;  "Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris." 

3IO 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  115 

hours."270    The  mayor  then  assured  him  that  he  had  nothing  to 
fear  in  the  midst  of  the  people.271 

Petion  was  raised  on  the  shoulders  of  several  citizens  and 
tried  to  speak.-272  The  noise  was  frightful  and  he  had  much  diffi- 
culty in  making  himself  heard.  "  Citizens ! "  he  cried,  and  the 
crowd  became  more  quiet.  He  told  them  that  they  had  made 
their  representations  to  the  hereditary  representative  of  the  nation 
with  a  dignity  becoming  a  free  people  and  urged  them  to  retire 
with  the  dignity  with  which  they  had  entered.  But  the  clamor 
and  shouts  continued  and  the  people  did  not  move  on.  They  called 
for  a  definite  answer  from  the  king  and  cried,  "  Down  with  the 
veto!  Sanction  the  decrees!  Recall  the  ministers!  Long  live 
the  nation ! "  Then  Petion,  mounted  on  a  chair,  spoke  firmly. 
He  said  that  this  was  not  a  suitable  time  to  demand  of  the  king 
the  recall  of  the  veto,  that  he  must  have  time  in  which  to  deliberate, 
else  it  would  be  said  that  the  king  was  not  free.  He  said  he  had 
no  doubt  that  when  the  eighty-three  departments  of  France  ex- 
pressed their  wish  the  king  would  yield  to  the  manifest  desires 
of  the  people.  He  continued  to  urge  them  to  retire.  He  said 
they  had  entered  with  the  dignity  worthy  of  a  free  people  and 
had  expressed  their  wishes  and  that  they  ought  now  to  retire  for 
if  they  remained  longer  they  would  give  occasion  to  their  enemies 
to  calumniate  their  good  intentions  and  those  of  their  magistrates 
and  again  strongly  insisted  that  they  move  on.-273  But  while  the 
people  heard  Petion  respectfully  and  applauded  him,  they  replied 
to  him  with  a  demand  for  a  definite  response  from  the  king  and 


1 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine." 
The  exact  words  are  Fontaine's. 

271 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Declaration  de  Lesieur." 
272  Sergent  says  he  was  one  of  those  who  helped  lift  him  up. 

' "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent "  ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  " ; 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Patris " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Cham- 
pion"; "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier  ";  Declarations  made  before  the  justice 
of  the  peace  of  the  section  of  the  Tuileries  the  25th  of  June,  1792,  by 
Montmorin,  Hemery,  Dorival  and  Dossonville,  Lesieur  and  Becquey,  in 
Ternaux,  I,  404;  "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire  " ;  Roederer,  Chronique 
de  cinquante  jours,  61. 


n6  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

then  there  were  heard  again  the  cries,  "Down  with  the  veto! 
Recall  the  ministers !  Sanction  the  decrees !  "274 

Champion,  who  was  standing  near  the  mayor  while  he  spoke, 
was  much  offended  and  expressed  his  displeasure  with  the  mayor's 
words.  He  was,  however,  reproached  by  his  colleagues,  accord- 
ing to  the  account  of  one  of  them,  for  showing  too  great 
excitement.275 

During  this  scene  of  confusion  a  handsome,  blond  young  man 
made  his  way  through  the  crowd  and  approaching  the  king,  spoke 
to  him  with  vehemence.  He  addressed  him  as  "  Sire  "  and  said 
that  if  he  did  not  enforce  the  constitution  and  sanction  the  decrees 
of  the  assembly  and  recall  the  patriotic  ministers  the  people  would 
force  him  from  the  throne.  The  king  calmly  answered,  "  I  have 
not  turned  aside  from  the  path  of  the  constitution."  Petion  who 
stood  near  and  heard  these  words  addressed  to  the  king  said 
nothing.-276 


' "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Champion";  report  made  in  the  Society  of  the  Jacobins,  June  20,  Aulard, 
Societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  22. 

;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Champion  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris."  Champion  was  one  of  the  municipal  officers  who  had  not  re- 
ceived a  notice  of  the  meeting  of  the  municipal  corps  on  the  morning  of 
the  20th.  His  proces-verbal  shows  great  animus  against  Petion  and  his 
statements  that  Petion  was  indifferent  in  his  efforts  to  clear  the  apart- 
ments are  contradicted  by  every  other  account.  His  suppression  of  the 
things  Petion  said  in  his  address  to  the  crowd  amounts  to  misrepre- 
sentation. 

278 "  Declaration  de  Lecrosnier " ;  "  Declaration  de  M.  Vinfray,"  both 
guards  in  the  ceil-de-bceuf.  Aulard,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  22,  gives 
the  young  man's  own  version  of  this  incident  as  he  gave  it  to  the  Jacobin 
Club  the  same  evening.  The  king's  exact  words  are  not  established  by 
the  evidence.  I  have  used  the  young  man's  own  report  of  the  king's 
words  in  the  text.  Lecrosnier  says  the  king  said:  "You  do  not  conform 
to  the  law.  Address  yourself  to  the  magistrate  of  the  people."  Vinfray 
does  not  give  the  king's  answer.  The  Nouvelle  correspondance  politique 
for  June  24  (XIII,  2)  says  the  young  man's  name  was  Clement  and  that 
he  was  twenty-two  years  old.  The  same  statement  is  made  in  Le  cri  de  la 
douleur  of  June  23.  The  paper  is  royalist  and  contrasts  the  young  man's 
handsome  exterior  with  his  tiger's  heart;  Lecrosnier  says  he  was  twenty- 
five. 

312 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  117 

Petion  continued  his  efforts  to  start  the  crowd  moving.  Munic- 
ipal officers  succeeded  in  forming  a  double  line  of  national 
guards  'between  which  the  people  could  file  and  so  could  be 
directed  away  from  the  entrance  to  the  apartments.277  At  the 
suggestion  of  Sergent  and  Hu  the  king  ordered  the  apartments 
to  be  opened  so  that  the  people  could  pass  out  by  the  gallery. 
Petion,  still  mounted  on  a  chair,  announced  the  orders  given  by 
the  king  to  the  effect  that  the  procession  should  go  out  on  the 
side  of  the  corridor,  repeated  what  he  had  said  to  the  people 
before  and  continued  to  urge  them  to  retire.278  Sergent  then 
spoke,  but  it  was  difficult  to  hear  him  because  everybody  spoke 
at  once.  He  took  off  his  scarf  and  displaying  it  in  his  hands, 
asked  the  people  in  the  name  of  this  emblem  of  the  law  to  retire. 
In  his  efforts  he  was  seconded  by  Patris  and  Champion,  who 
threw  themselves  into  the  crowd  and  urged  the  people  in  the  name 
of  the  law  to  retire.-279  Slowly  the  crowd  began  to  move  out 
between  the  lines  of  guards.  As  they  moved  along,  there  were 
cries  of  " Recall  the  ministers!  Down  with  the  veto!  Sanction 
the  decrees !  Long  live  the  nation !  "28°  And  as  they  passed 
Petion,  cries  of  "  Long  live  Petion ! "  were  heard  and  the  mayor 
saluted  the  crowd  as  it  retired.281 

The  object  of  the  mayor  and  municipal  officers  had  been  to 
relieve  the  pressure  around  the  king  so  that  he  might  pass  into  his 
apartments.  Guards  had  already  been  placed  at  the  lower  door 
and  in  the  halls  with  orders  to  let  no  more  people  enter.282  But 
just  at  this  time  the  first  deputation  that  had  been  sent  out  by  the 

277 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine." 

278  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  "  ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent "  ; 
"  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu." 

279 Proces-verbaux  of  Sergent,  Champion,  and  Hu;  "  Conduite  tenue  par 
M.  le  maire." 

280 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu." 

281 "  Declaration  de  Fontaine";  "  Extrait  d'une  lettre  ecrite  de  Paris, 
21  juin  a  Dupin  et  fils  a  Montpellier  "  in  Revue  historique  de  la  revolution 
frangaise,  II,  597. 

282 "  Declaration  de  J.  J.  Leroux  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent." 

3^3 


n8  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

national  assembly  arrived  at  the  chateau  and  this  opened  the  way 
for  new  crowds  of  people.283 

The  deputation  was  led  by  the  deputy,  Brunck,  who  addressed 
the  king.  He  said  that  the  national  assembly  had  sent  twenty- 
four  of  its  members  to  assure  itself  of  the  state  of  his  person,  to 
protect  his  constitutional  liberty  and  to  share  his  dangers  if  there 
were  any.  The  king  answered  that  he  was  cognizant  of  and 
grateful  for  the  solicitude  of  the  assembly,  but  that  he  was  in  the 
midst  of  the  people  and  had  no  fear,  and  that  his  conscience  was 
clear.284  Meantime  the  crowd  moved  slowly  on,  showing  every- 
where the  greatest  respect  for  the  representatives  of  the  people 
and  for  the  municipal  officers.285  Petion  was  now  most  energetic 
in  his  efforts,  moving  from  apartment  to  apartment,  urging  the 
people  to  pass  on.  Municipal  officers  formed  lines  of  national 
guards  in  the  hall  through  which  the  people  could  pass  out.  With 
the  help  of  some  officers  of  the  law  who  carried  ivory  batons, 
the  municipal  officers  soon  had  the  space  around  the  king  cleared 
once  more.-286  Urged  by  the  deputies  to  retire  within  his  apart- 
ments the  king  accepted  the  suggestion  which  he  seems  to  have 
refused  twice  before.287  He  was  then  surrounded  by  the  deputies 


2S3Ibid.;  "Declaration  de  Fontaine";  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Cham- 
pion." 

'"Declaration  de  Fontaine";  report  made  by  Brunck  and  Lejosne  to 
the  assembly  the  same  evening  in  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI, 
339;  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  283;  Moniteur,  XII,  719. 

285  Reports  made  in  the  assembly  by  Lejosne,  Dalloz  and  another  member 
whose  name  is  not  given;  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  339  ff. ; 
Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No.  268,  p.  284  ff. ;  Moniteur,  719;  "Declara- 
tion de  J.  J.  Leroux  " ;  proces-verbaux  of  Champion,  Hu,  and  Sergent. 

1 "  Conduite  tenue  par  M.  le  maire " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par 
Patris " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent."  Sergent  says  these  men 
were  Dorival  and  Dossonville.  Aulard,  Societe  des  Jacobins,  IV,  23.  The 
"blond  young  man"  who  reported  this  incident  in  the  Jacobin  Club  said 
that  these  men  with  ivory  batons  said  very  politely  to  the  people,  "  Re- 
spect the  law !  " 

"Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent";  report  of  Lejosne  in  the  assem- 
bly referred  to  above.  Fontaine  in  his  "  Declaration  "  says  that  Aclocq 
proposed  this  to  the  king.  It  is  probable  that  all  urged  the  king  to  with- 
draw. According  to  their  own  declarations  both  Mouchet  and  Hu  had 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  119 

from  the  assembly  and  by  national  guards.  They  all  passed  into 
the  state  bedchamber  and  from  there  through  a  private  door  into 
his  apartments.288  It  was  now  eight  o'clock. 

While  the  king  underwent  his  ordeal  for  four  hours  or  more  in 
the  ceil-de-bceu-f,  the  queen,  in  her  apartments,  also  suffered  great 
mental  anguish.  Late  in  the  afternoon  a  detachment  of  guards 
was  sent  to  her  apartments  and  those  of  the  prince  royal  with 
orders  to  let  no  one  enter.  They  found  the  halls  practically  de- 
serted, there  being  only  three  or  four  guards  and  only  about  thirty 
guns,  abandoned  in  the  rack.  The  crowd  was  already  pounding 
upon  the  doors  and  trying  to  force  entrance.289  Meantime  the 
queen  was  on  the  verge  of  distraction  for  the  safety  of  the  king 
and  the  prince  royal.  She  had  with  her  her  two  children,  the 
prince  royal  and  Madame  Royale,  the  Princesse  de  Lamballe, 
Madame  Tourzelle,  Rougeville,  Guingerlot,  Paroy  and  several 
other  members  of  the  court.290  When  the  crowd  began  to  attack 
the  door  she  insisted  upon  going  to  the  king,  saying  she  wished 
to  share  his  danger,  but  was  prevented  from  doing  so  'by  those 
present.291  She  had  the  prince  sent  to  the  apartments  of  Madame 
Royale,  then  brought  back  to  her.292 

proposed  the  king's  retirement  earlier,  but  he  refused.  He  probably  sus- 
pected the  motives  of  these  officers. 

"  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Fontaine  "  ;  "  Proces- 
verbal  dresse  par  Champion";  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVII, 
77;  Lettre  d'un  depute  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  Blanc-Gilli;  Lettre  de 
Ph-Ch-Ai  Goupilleau;  Extrait  d'une  lettre  ecrite  de  Paris  en  datte  du  21 
juin  a  Dupin  et  fits  a  Montpellier  in  Revue  hist,  de  la  rev.  fran.,  II,  597. 

289  Declarations  of  Mussey,  Turot,  and  Jaladon.  The  same  statement  is 
signed  by  four  of  Mussey's  subordinates,  Cuvillier,  Chauvreau,  Corps  and 
Balin.  These  are  found  with  those  of  Mussey  and  Turot  in  "  Declarations 
regues  par  la  juge  de  paix  de  la  section  du  Roi  de  Sicile." 

290 "  Declaration  de  Guingerlot " ;  Paroy,  Memoires;  Madame  Tourzelle, 
"  Recit,"  in  Archives  nationales,  C  222,  No.  i6o162 ;  "  Deposition  de  Rouge- 
ville." 

291 "  Deposition  de  Rougeville  " ;  Madame  Tourzelle,  "  Recit,"  in  Archives 
nationales,  C  222,  No.  i6o152;  Recit  exact  et  circonstancie  de  ce  qui  s'est 
passe  au  chateau  des  Tuilleries,  20  juin,  1792.  This  pamphlet  gives  details 
of  how  the  queen  insisted  that  she  would  go  to  the  king  and  share  his 
danger  but  was  prevented  by  Rougeville  and  Aubier,  who,  authorized  by 
Madame  Elizabeth,  forcibly  detained  her.  This  account  is  anonymous  and 

315 


I2O  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

The  guards  outside  made  vigorous  resistance  for  about  an  hour 
against  the  crowd  that  struck  the  doors  and  uttered  menaces  and 
insults  against  the  queen.  The  people  were  determined  to  reach 
her  apartments  and  in  the  struggle  one  of  the  captains  of  grena- 
diers, Lasue,  was  wounded.  Seeing  the  uselessness  of  resistance, 
the  commandant  of  the  Tuileries,  Lieutenant  General  Wittinghof 
ordered  the  doors  opened  and  the  crowd  rushed  in.  Once  in  the 
apartments,  the  crowd  showed  great  curiosity,  overturning  screens, 
forcing  doors,  rummaging  beds,  and  at  the  same  time  uttering 
oaths  and  menaces  against  the  queen.293 

When  it  became  evident  that  the  people  were  determined  to 
see  the  queen,  she  was  taken  into  the  council  chamber  of  the  king 
through  which  the  procession  must  pass  in  descending  to  the  court. 
Between  the  ceil-de-bceuf  and  the  council  chamber  was  the  state 
bedchamber  through  which  the  crowd  passed.294  With  her  were 
Madame  Elizabeth  who  had  come  to  join  her,  the  prince,  his 
sister  and  several  ladies  of  the  court,  among  them  Madame  Tour- 
zelle  and  the  Princesse  de  Lamballe.  Lieutenant  General  Wit- 
tinghof, Lajard,  minister  of  war,  and  Chambonas,  minister  of 
foreign  affairs,  were  also  beside  her.  The  queen  and  her  com- 
panions had  been  placed  in  a  window  recess  behind  the  large 
council  table  in  front  of  which  there  were  two  rows  of  grenadiers 
of  the  Filles-Saint-Thomas,  commanded  by  Mandat.295  As  soon 

was  written  later  than  June  23d  and,  being  very  similar  to  that  of  Rouge- 
ville,  I  assume  it  is  drawn  from  him.  See  also  "  Bulletin  avec  details  sur 
ce  qui  s'est  passe  aux  Tuilleries  le  20  juin,  1792,"  in  Klinckowstrom,  II, 
303;  "Bulletin  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  aux  Tuilleries  le  20  juin,  1792,"  dated 
June  21,  Klinckowstrom,  II,  307. 

282 "  Deposition  de  Rougeville";  Madame  Tourzelle,  "  Recit,"  in  the 
Archives  nationales,  C  222,  No.  i6o162.  Paroy  in  his  Memoires  says  the 
queen  first  sent  the  little  dauphin  to  the  apartments  of  Madame  Mackan, 
who  lived  just  under  the  roof,  by  Hue,  his  valet  de  chambre,  but  in  her 
excitement  called  him  back  before  he  got  there  and  then  she  fainted. 

283  Declarations  of  Mussey,  Turot,  and  Jaladon. 

294  Guibout  says  in  his  "  Declaration  "  that  the  people  cried,  "  Is  this  the 
bed  of  the  great  Veto?  Monsieur  Veto  has  a  more  beautiful  bed  than  we 
have.  Where  is  the  great  Veto?  "  etc. 

' "  Rapport  de  Mandat " ;  "  Rapport  de  Lagard  " ;  "  Deposition  de 
Rougeville";  "Declaration  de  Leclerc";  "Declaration  de  Guingerlot"; 

316 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  121 

as  the  crowd  began  to  cross  the  apartments,  Santerre  entered  and 
took  his  place  beside  her,  at  her  right.  She  seemed  disturbed  at 
first.  Addressing  her,  he  told  her  that  she  deceived  herself ;  that 
the  people  wished  her  no  harm;  that  if  she  desired  it,  there  was 
not  one  of  them  who  would  not  love  her  as  much  as  her  child 
did ;  he  begged  her  to  save  France  and  assured  her  that  she  had 
nothing  to  fear.  He  then  assumed  the  role  of  her  protector  while 
the  crowd  passed.296  He  ordered  the  guard  to  make  room  so  that 
the  people  might  enter  and  see  the  queen  and  as  they  passed  he 
urged  them  on. 

A  woman  in  the  procession  offered  Wittinghof  a  red  cap,  which 
he  gave  to  the  queen.  She  put  it  on  her  head  and  then  on  the 
head  of  the  prince  royal.297  After  a  quarter  of  an  hour  Santerre, 
pitying  the  child's  discomfort,  said  to  his  mother,  "  Take  the  cap 
off  of  the  child,  it  is  too  warm."  All  this  time,  he  kept  urging 
the  people  to  pass  on,  saying  to  them,  "  Look  at  the  queen !  Look 
at  the  prince  royal !  "298  A  woman  in  the  procession  stopped 
before  the  queen  and,  looking  at  her,  began  to  weep.  Santerre 
pushed  her  on,  saying  she  was  drunk.299  The  queen  remained 
throughout  this  ordeal  remarkably  calm  and  courageous.300 

Several  municipal  officers  now  entered  the  room  where  the 


"Lettre  de  J.  B.  Mosneron"  in  Revue  d'histoire  moderne  et  contempo- 
raine,  XI,  115.  Romainvilliers  says  ("  Eclaircissement  a  demander  a  M. 
le  commandant-general")  that  he  sent  a  detachment  of  guards  to  the 
queen  and  himself  watched  her,  but  no  one  else  mentions  this.  See  also 
Report  of  Santerre  to  the  mayor,  Ternaux,  I,  415. 

296 "  Extrait  du  rapport  fait  par  Santerre  au  maire,"  in  Ternaux,  I,  415 ; 
Oelsner  in  Revue  historique,  LXXXVII,  84;  "Declaration  de  Leclerc." 

297  "  Rapport  de  Mandat " ;  "  Rapport  de  Lagard  " ;  "  Recit  de  Madame 
Tourzelle  " ;  "  Declaration  de  Leclerc  " ;  "  Deposition  de  Rougeville."    The 
first  three  witnesses  say  that  Santerre  entered  before  the  hat  was  pre- 
sented; the  other  two  say  he  entered  afterward.     The  last  two  are  the 
only  ones  who  speak  of  Wittinghof  giving  the  red  hat  to  the  queen.    The 
others  say  some  one  gave  it  to  her  or  a  woman  gave  it  to  her. 

298  "  Rapport    de    Mandat " ;    "  Rapport    de  .  Lagard  " ;    "  Deposition    de 
Rougeville." 

299  "Rapport  de  Mandat."    In  the  declarations  made  before  the  justice 
of  the  peace  of  the  section  Roi  de  Sicile,  two  of  Mussey's  subordinates 
refer  to  a  woman  who  was  probably  this  one.     Cuvillier  says  she  was 

317 


122  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

queen  was  to  aid  in  clearing  the  apartments ;  among  them  were 
Champion  and  Leroux.301  Two  rows  of  national  guards  had  been 
drawn  up  by  LaChesnaye,  chief  of  the  sixth  legion,  extending 
from  the  ail-de-bocuf  through  the  state  bed  chamber,  the  council 
hall,  and  the  corridors  to  an  outside  entrance  and  the  crowd 
passed  out  between  them.302  Municipal  officers  continued  to  urge 
the  people  on,  but  many  lingered,  asking  what  answer  the  king 
had  made  to  the  demand  for  the  recall  of  the  vetoes  and  for  the 
return  of  the  patriotic  ministry.  Some  complained  that  they  had 
been  brought  there  for  nothing,  but  that  they  would  return  and 
would  have  what  they  wished.  Two  guards  testified  that  they 
heard  Santerre  say  on  starting  from  the  chateau,  "  The  king  has 
been  hard  to  move  to-day.  We  will  return  to-morrow ;  we  will 
make  him  give  in."303  At  about  half  past  eight  every  one  had 
retired  and  the  queen  and  the  royal  family  joined  the  king  in 
his  apartment.  Weeping,  they  threw  themselves  into  each  other's 
arms  and  a  touching  scene  followed.304 

The  deputies  who  entered  the  king's  apartment  with  him  re- 
mained for  a  time,  when  a  second  and  then  a  third  deputation 
from  the  assembly  came  in.  These  had  all  been  required  by 
municipal  officers  outside  to  show  their  cards  before  entering.305 
The  last  deputation  arrived  about  nine  o'clock  and  talked  with 
the  king  and  his  family  about  an  hour.  The  queen  took  them  to 

dumb  and  Guffroy  says  she  wept.  See  their  declarations  in  Recueil  de 
pieces,  XXXVII. 

300  Recit  de  Madame  Tourzelle ;  Bulletin  avec  details  sur  ce  qui  s'est  passe 
aux   Tuilleries   le  20  juin,    1792.     Letter  of  J.   B.   Mosneron   in   Revue 
d'histoire  moderne  et  contemporaine,  XI,  116. 

301  Declarations  of  Champion  and  J.  J.  Leroux. 

1 "  Declaration  de  LaChesnaye  " ;  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent." 

803 "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hti " ;  Azema,  Letter  of  June  20,  1792,  in 

Revolution   frangaise,    XXVII,    172;    "Declaration    du    commandant    du 

deuxieme  bataillon  de  la  quatrieme  legion  et  plusieurs  grenadiers  et  volon- 

taires  du  meme  bataillon,"  signed  Blouet  and  Pical. 

'"Declaration  de  Gosse  " ;  Bourcet  in  Revolution  frangaise,  XVI,  77; 
Letter  of  J.  B.  Mosneron  to  Louis  XVIII,  in  Revue  d'histoire  moderne 
et  contemporaine,  XI,  116;  Note  historique  sur  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792, 
par  le  Sr.  Joly. 

'  "  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Sergent." 

318 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  ij<)2  123 

see  the  little  prince,  who  was  playful  and  charming.  Some  of 
the  aristocratic  deputies  flattered  the  king  and  queen,  but  the 
patriotic  deputies  made  objection  to  this.  The  king  spoke  kindly 
of  the  people  and  made  no  complaint.  At  about  ten  o'clock,  they 
all  retired,  leaving  the  family  alone.308 

Petion,  who  had  left  the  king  when  the  deputation  from  the 
assembly  arrived,  continued  to  make  the  greatest  efforts  to  clear 
the  chateau.  Carried  on  the  shoulders  of  two  grenadiers,  he 
urged  the  crowd  on  the  stairway,  in  the  vestibule  and  in  the 
courts,  in  the  name  of  the  law,  to  follow  him,  remaining  at  the 
principal  door  until  all  had  passed  out.  He  was  ably  seconded 
by  the  municipal  officers,  Sergent,  Leroux,  Hu,  Patris,  Mouchet 
and  Champion.  These  formed  lines  of  guards  to  prevent  new 
crowds  entering,  urged  the  people  in  the  name  of  the  law  to  go 
out,  and  their  efforts  added  to  the  zeal  and  energy  of  the  mayor 
were  effective.  The  people  everywhere  passed  on  without  resist- 
ance.307 

It  was  still  a  question  of  clearing  the  courts  and  the  garden  and 
closing  the  gate.  Sergent  and  Hu  with  some  national  guards 
succeeded  in  this  with  little  effort  and  closed  and  guarded  the 
gates.  Petion  with  Sergent,  Hu  and  Leroux,  returned  to  the 
apartments  to  see  that  no  stragglers  remained.  Finding  all  was 
well,  Petion  went  to  the  national  assembly  to  give  an  account  of 


306 Lettre  de  Ph-Ch-Ai  Goupilleau;  Letter  of  Azema  in  Revolution 
frangaise,  XXVII,  172;  Lettre  d'un  depute,  etc.,  Blanc-Gilli.  Azema  says 
that  in  the  conversation  the  king  showed  a  remarkable  memory  for  inci- 
dents and  persons  and  details  of  the  afternoon's  events.  He  says  he  spoke 
of  Santerre  and  of  Theroinge.  Theroinge  is  mentioned  as  being  in  the 
crowd  by  the  Nouvelle  correspondance  politique,  XII,  2;  Varenne,  His- 
toire  particulicre,  also  says  she  was  in  the  crowd  this  day  but  neither  of 
these  state  that  she  was  in  the  chateau.  Theroinge  was  a  well  known  revo- 
lutionary character,  a  very  beautiful  woman  of  the  demi-monde.  One 
authority,  a  police  report  found  in  Archives  nationales,  1^4387,  states  that 
she  was  in  the  crowd  on  the  20th  and  that  she  did  not  cease  to  provoke 
the  people  to  support  the  project  of  the  faubourgs.  The  report  is  signed, 
Minot. 

307 "  Conduit  tenue  par  M.  le  maire  " ;  Declarations  of  J.  J.  Leroux  and 
Legrand,  made  to  the  justice  of  the  peace  of  the  section  Roi  de  Sicile; 
Proces-verbaux  of  Sergent,  Patris,  Hu,  Mouchet,  and  Champion. 

319 


124  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

his  conduct  during  the  day.     It  was  now  ten  o'clock  and  the 
courts  and  gardens  of  the  chateau  were  silent.308 

The  constituted  authorities  plainly  feared  a  repetition  of  the 
day's  events  on  the  morrow  and  so  took  precautions  to  prevent  it 
before  they  retired  that  night.  Petion  wrote  to  the  commandant 
at  ten  o'clock :  "  It  is  reported,  M.  le  commandant,  that  the 
citizens  are  going  to  the  Tuileries  tomorrow.  I  avow  that  I  do 
not  believe  it,  but  as  it  is  not  permissible  to  neglect  a  matter  of 
this  importance,  I  ask  you  to  bring  an  imposing  force,  to  estab- 
lish patrols,  in  a  word  to  take  every  precaution  for  safety."309  At 
half  past  ten  the  directory  of  the  department  met  and  passed  the 
following  decree :  "  Ordered  that  the  mayor  and  municipality  of 
Paris  do  insure,  by  all  the  means  the  law  has  put  into  their  power, 
security  and  public  peace,  especially  the  safety  of  the  king,  the 
royal  family  and  the  chateau  of  the  Tuileries."310  They  then 
wrote  to  Petion  asking  him  to  come  to  the  directory  at  nine  o'clock 
in  the  morning  with  some  municipal  officers  to  arrange  with  them 
measures  to  be  taken  to  insure  public  order  for  the  day.311  At 
eleven  o'clock,  Terrier,  the  minister  of  the  interior,  wrote  to  the 
directory :  "  I  ask  you,  gentlemen,  in  the  name  of  the  king,  to  come 
to  the  Tuileries  to  arrange  with  us  some  means  of  insuring  order 
this  night."312  He  wrote  another  letter  showing  his  fears  for  the 
morrow  and  said,  "I  learn,  gentlemen,  that  the  same  gathering 
which  occurred  today  is  going  to  form  tomorrow.  I  ask  you  in 
the  name  of  the  country  to  use  all  means  which  the  law  has  en- 
trusted to  you  to  maintain  order  and  prevent  the  deadly  occur- 
rence with  which  we  have  been  threatened  today."313  It  appears 


1 "  Conduit  tenue  par  M.  le  maire " ;  Proces-verbaux  of  Hu,  Sergent, 
Leroux,  and  Champion;  report  of  Montjourdan  at  eleven-thirty  p.  m., 
June  20,  in  Archives  nationales,  C  222,  i6o152. 

809  Petion  to  the  commandant,   June  20,    1792,  ten   p.   m.,   in   Archives 
nationales,  F74774™. 

810  Deliberations  of  the  directory,  ten-thirty  p.  m./  in  Revue  retrospective, 
2  serie,  I,  177. 

^Directory  to  Petion  in  Archives  nationales,  FT477470. 

812  Terrier  to  the  directory,  June  20,  eleven  p.  m.,  in  Revue  retrospective, 
2  serie,  I,  190. 

818  Terrier    to    the    directory,    June    20,    1792,    in    Archives    nationales, 
F747747°. 

320 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  125 

from  this  that  the  threats  of  the  crowd  on  going  out  of  the 
chateau  and  their  disappointment  in  not  receiving  a  promise 
from  the  king  were  taken  seriously.  Especially  at  the  Tuileries 
was  the  recurrence  of  the  movement  feared.314 

During  all  the  confusion  and  uproar  at  the  chateau  the  assem- 
bly, which  we  saw  resume  its  session  at  five  o'clock,  continued  its 
deliberations.  It  listened  to  reports  of  the  invasion  of  the 
Tuileries  and  continued  to  express  its  disapproval  of  any  state- 
ment which  intimated  that  there  was  danger  to  the  king's  person. 
The  temper  of  the  assembly  and  its  extreme  sensitiveness  are 
seen  in  its  behavior  toward  the  next  two  speakers.  Brunck,  who 
was  spokesman  for  the  first  deputation  sent  to  the  Tuileries,  re- 
ported the  king's  remark  that  he  had  no  fear  because  he  was 
in  the  midst  of  "his  people."  This  statement  caused  much  dis- 
approval and  murmurs  were  heard.  The  assembly  was  calmed 
only  by  the  remark  of  another  deputy,  Lejosne,  who  said  that  he 
had  heard  the  king  say  that  he  was  in  the  midst  of  the  "  French 
people,"  not  "his  people."315  Dalloz316  followed  with  the  report 
that  the  representative  of  the  people  had  everywhere  received 
marks  of  respect.  He  added  that  the  king,  on  being  reassured  by 
some  deputies,  answered  that  a  good  man  who  had  a  clear  con- 
science is  not  afraid  and  that  he  took  the  hand  of  a  national 
guard  and  carried  it  to  his  heart  saying,  "  See  if  it  palpitates  and 
if  I  am  afraid."  This  brought  great  applause.317  The  second 


'"Observations  du  21  juin,  1792,"  Soltho  Douglas  in  Archives  nation- 
ales,  W  Ib25i.  Sergent-Marceau  says  ("  Notice  historique  sur  les  evene- 
ments  du  10  aout  1792  et  20  et  21  juin,  precedents")  that  this  man,  "  le 
petit  abbe  Soltho  Douglas,"  was  in  the  pay  of  the  court  to  give  informa- 
tion to  the  police. 

315  Journal   de  I'assemblee   nationale,   XXI,   339;   Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  283;  Moniteur,  XII,  719. 

316  Spelled  variously :  Dalloz,  Dallot,  Alos.    The  correct  spelling,  accord- 
ing to  Kucinsky,  is  Dalloz. 

317  This  is  the  second  time  that  this  incident,  concerning  the  king,  is 
reported  on  this  day.    The  statement  that  it  occurred  at  this  time  is  borne 
out  by  Oelsner  (Revue  historique,  LXXXVIII,  83),  who  was  in  the  ocil- 
de-boeuf.     He  says  the  king  took  the  hand  of  a  deputy  and  held  it  to  his 
heart.      The   incident    is   a   third    time    reported   by   Azema    (Revolution 

32I 


126  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

deputation  that  had  been  sent  out  by  the  assembly  now  returned 
and  reported  that  all  was  quiet  at  the  Tuileries  and  that  the  king 
had  retired  to  his  apartments  and  had  there  said  that  he  felt  no 
fear  in  the  midst  of  "  his  people."  At  these  words  the  tumult 
broke  out  afresh  and  Becquey  shouted  that  this  was  no  time  to 
quarrel  over  words.  When  the  tumult  ceased  a  deputy  reported 
that  the  only  violence  committed  at  the  chateau  was  the  breaking 
of  some  doors  and  locks.318 

Presently  Petion  and  some  municipal  officers  appeared  at  the 
bar  of  the  assembly  and  the  tumult  recommenced.  Petion  was 
greeted  with  applause  and  menaces.  His  report  was  an  attempt 
to  justify  his  conduct  on  this  day.  He  spoke  as  follows :  "  Gentle- 
men, I  ask  your  indulgence  because  I  have  not  had  time  to  put  my 
ideas  in  order.  There  has  been  some  anxiety  because  of  the  great 
number  of  citizens  who  have  gone  into  the  apartments  of  the 
king.  The  king,  gentlemen,  has  had  no  anxiety,  for  he  knows  the 
French  people  better.  He  well  knows  how  his  person  has  been 
respected  for  the  last  three  years.  He  knows  that  the  magistrates 
have  labored  without  ceasing  to  assure  the  king  the  respect  due 
him  under  the  constitution.  The  magistrates,  gentlemen,  have 
done  their  duty,  I  dare  say,  with  great  zeal  and  I  have  been  much 
disturbed  that  some  persons  have  seemed  to  doubt  it  for  one 
instant."  Here  he  was  interrupted  by  cries  of,  "  And  who  still 
doubt  it!"  There  were  murmurs  and  shouts  of,  "Call  him  to 
order!  call  him  to  order!"319 

Then  a  member  demanded  that  any  one  who  was  wanting  in 
respect  to  a  petitioner  or  to  a  magistrate  of  the  people  who  came 
to  give  an  account -of  his  conduct,  should  be  denounced.  Boul- 
lenger  cried,  in  answer  to  this,  that  no  one  had  yet  denounced 
those  who  were  wanting  in  respect  to  the  king  and  those  who 
were  the  authors  of  a  plot  and  Ducos  retorted  that  if  Boullenger 

jranqaise,  XXVII,  174)  as  having  occurred  in  the  apartments  after  the 
king  had  retired  from  the  crowd. 

318  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  341;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  285. 

*9  This  speech  of  Petion's  is  the  same  in  the  Moniteur,  XII,  720,  Journal 
de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  341,  and  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets,  No. 
268,  p.  285. 

322 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  127 

did  not  denounce  the  plot,  he  would  brand  upon  his  forehead  the 
name  of  calumniator.  This  brought  great  applause  from  the 
galleries.  But  the  assembly  refused  Boullenger  the  floor  and 
Petion  continued. 

"  Some  people  do  not  know  what  the  municipality  has  done. 
It  is  not  for  me  to  pronounce. eulogies  upon  its  conduct,  but  I  can 
say  that  it  has  performed  its  duty  in  a  way  that  merits  appro- 
bation." He  then  reviewed  the  movement  since  his  first  informa- 
tion concerning  it.  He  spoke  of  the  municipality  having  learned 
on  June  16  that  a  petition  was  to  be  presented  to  the  assembly 
and  to  the  king,  and  said  that  the  municipal  council  had  refused 
to  authorize  the  movement  because  the  citizens  had  asked  to  pre- 
sent themselves  in  arms  without  specifying  that  they  belonged  to 
the  national  guards  or  to  a  battalion,  but  that,  when  circumstances 
had  changed,  this  same  council  gave  the  battalions  permission  to 
march.  He  said  that  the  chiefs  of  the  battalions  had  presented 
themselves  at  the  mayoralty  and  had  assured  the  mayor  that  the 
intentions  of  the  citizens  were  good  and  that  the  constituted 
authorities  had  at  other  times  permitted  citizens  to  march  armed 
and  that  they  had  been  well  received  by  the  national  assembly. 
Why  discriminate  against  them?  Then  they  [the  officers]  said 
that  they  would  not  be  the  ones  to  prevent  the  citizens  from 
marching  armed.  In  consequence  of  this  a  prudent  measure  was 
taken  by  the  municipality.  The  battalions  were  authorized  to 
march  and  the  other  citizens  were  allowed  to  place  themselves 
under  the  national  flag  and  under  the  chiefs  recognized  by  law. 
Thus  the  citizens  marched  legally  and  being  under  recognized 
chiefs  would  do  no  wrong. 

This  measure  was  communicated  to  the  department,  which  did 
not  approve  of  it.  Immediately  the  police  and  the  mayor  had 
taken  every  precaution  and  had  conformed  to  the  letter  which 
the  directory  had  written  to  them.  But  Petion  said  there  had 
been  no  need  of  referring  to  the  directory  of  the  department 
because  the  public  force  could  not  act  without  authority  from  the 
municipality.  He  said  that  municipal  officers  had  been  sent  to 
the  gathering  places  in  the  faubourgs  on  the  morning  of  June  20 
to  speak  to  the  citizens  and  that  the  citizens  insisted  that  they 

323 


128  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

would  not  form  a  mob  nor  cause  a  riot.  In  view  of  these  cir- 
cumstances, he  called  the  municipality  together  and,  believing 
that  it  would  be  very  imprudent  and  very  dangerous  to  allow 
forty  thousand  men  to  move  without  leaders,  the  municipality 
decided  to  legalize  the  movement  by  requiring  the  battalions  to 
march  under  their  commandants,  allowing  the  citizens  to  range 
themselves  under  the  flag  of  the  national  guard.  It  was  under 
these  circumstances  that  the  citizens  had  presented  their  petition 
to  the  assembly  and  to  the  king. 

He  said  that  the  citizens,  having  marched  through  the  assembly 
and  the  Tuileries,  respecting  property  and  insulting  no  one,  had 
proved  that  they  had  no  intention  of  committing  excesses.  Any 
intentions  of  that  kind  could  easily  have  been  carried  out  for 
there  was  not  sufficient  police  force  to  have  prevented  anything 
the  crowd  might  have  attempted.  He  declared  he  had  gone  to 
the  Tuileries  and  had  done  all  he  could  to  restore  quiet  and  have 
the  apartments  cleared  as  promptly  as  possible  and  that  the 
king  had  nothing  to  complain  of  and  had  expressed  himself  so 
to  the  various  deputations  that  the  assembly  had  sent  to  him.  He 
said  all  was  now  quiet  at  the  Tuileries  and  that  he  hoped  it  would 
remain  so.  He  assured  them  that  the  magistrates  would  neglect 
no  measures  for  maintaining  the  peace.  This  was  followed  by 
reiterated  applause. 

In  conclusion  Petion  added,  "  I  have  heard  it  said  that  there 
are  plots.  It  will  be  necessary  for  the  public  safety  that  these 
should  be  made  known.  I  do  not  believe  that  any  good  citizen 
will  refuse  to  give  such  proofs  as  he  has,  to  enable  the  magistrates 
to  baffle  the  conspirators.  I  ask  all  the  members  of  the  assembly 
who  have  proofs,  to  present  them  and  the  magistrates  will  at  once 
perform  their  duty."  This  was  followed  by  much  applause.320 

Charlier  suggested  that  honorable  mention  should  be  made  of 
the  conduct  of  the  municipality.  Becquey  opposed  this  proposi- 
tion which  was  received  with  murmurs  and  cries  of,  "  No !  No  !"321 

320  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale,  XXI,  341  ff. ;  Journal  des  debats  et 
decrets,  No.  268,  p.  288  ff.;  Moniteur,  XII,  720. 

321  Ibid.     The  Journal  des  debats  et  decrets  does  not  give  the  name  of 
Charlier  and  the  Moniteur  does  not  mention  Becquey.     Otherwise  the 
accounts  agree. 

324 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  129 

After  some  other  business  had  been  presented  to  the  assembly, 
Guyton-Morveaux,  spokesman  of  the  last  deputation  sent  to  the 
king,  reported  that  all  was  quiet  at  the  Tuileries,  that  the 
deputies  had  remained  some  time  with  the  king  and  that  they  had 
seen  nothing  to  cause  alarm.  He  said  an  officer  of  the  guard  had 
reported  that  the  chateau  was  clear  and  that  the  king  had  retired 
to  rest.  The  assembly  adjourned  at  half  past  ten  o'clock.322 

So  ended  the  famous  demonstration  of  June  20,  1792.  That 
it  was  a  popular  uprising,  a  spontaneous  outburst  of  feeling 
against  the  king  because  of  his  duplicity  and  his  collusion  with  the 
foreign  enemy,  a  feeling  intensified  by  his  dismissal  of  the  minis- 
try and  his  refusal  to  sanction  the  decrees  of  the  assembly,  is 
clearly  seen.  The  war  which  had  been  forced  on  the  court  by  the 
assembly  and  carried  on  in  a  half-hearted  way  had  failed. 
Austria  was  presumptuously  interfering  in  the  internal  affairs  of 
France  and  the  constitution  which  the  revolution  had  made  pos- 
sible was  not  being  enforced  and  was  now  threatened  with  over- 
throw. The  king,  in  order  to  carry  out  his  anti-revolutionary 
policy,  dismissed  the  Girondist  ministry  and  vetoed  the  decrees 
for  the  establishment  of  a  camp  of  20,000  federes  to  protect 
Paris  and  the  assembly.  In  doing  this,  the  king  acted  within  his 
constitutional  rights. 

The  assembly,  although  it  believed  that  the  king  was  using 
this  technical  right  to  aid  the  invaders  and  to  defeat  the  revolu- 
tion, was  itself  unwilling  to  save  the  country  by  violating  the 
constitution. 

In  the  faubourgs,  where  the  people  felt  less  respect  for  con- 
stitutional restrictions,  there  was  deep  seated  distrust  of  the  king, 
a  strong  belief  in  his  treachery  and  fear  of  the  foreign  enemy. 
Ever  since  the  outbreak  of  the  war  in  April,  the  sections  in  the 
faubourgs  had  considered  organized  resistance  to  the  menaces 
from  the  court  within  and  from  the  enemy  without  France  and 
this  feeling  had  been  intensified  by  the  dismissal  of  the  Girondist 
ministry  and  the  veto  of  the  decrees.  The  men  of  the  faubourgs 
determined  to  save  France  by  bringing  pressure  to  bear  on  the 
assembly  and  by  forcing  the  king  to  act  in  accordance  with  the 

90  Ibid. 

225 


130  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

spirit  of  the  constitution.323  Thus  an  early  plan  to  celebrate  on 
June  20  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court  by  presenting  petitions  to 
the  king  and  to  the  assembly  and  by  planting  a  liberty  tree  took 
on,  from  these  circumstances,  a  revolutionary  character. 

The  movement  had  no  definite  prominent  leaders.  If  Girondins 
or  Jacobins  were  the  real  leaders,  their  acts  have  been  well  con- 
cealed, for  there  is  no  evidence  by  which  to  fix  responsibility 
upon  them.  The  Girondins  wished  the  recall  of  their  ministers 
and  trusted  that  the  uprising  would  contribute  to  this  end.  The 
Jacobins  did  not  wish  the  return  of  this  ministry,  as  that  would 
continue  a  constitutional  monarchy.  They  hoped  for  a  new 
revolution  which  would  overthrow  the  monarchy.  The  ostensible 
leadership  of  the  day  was  in  the  hands  of  the  popular  idols  of  the 
faubourgs. 

The  failure  to  prevent  the  movement  was  due  both  to  sympathy 
on  the  part  of  some  of  the  constituted  authorities  and  to  their 
conviction  that  any  attempt  at  repression  would  result  in  blood- 
shed. This  led  to  a  plan  to  permit  and  control  the  movement. 
The  mayor,  at  first  inactive,  was  forced  to  act  by  the  decrees  of 
the  directory  which  was  determined  to  check  the  uprising  even 
though  it  resulted  in  bloodshed.  The  mayor,  still  cautious,  on 
learning  from  the  commandants  of  the  faubourgs  that  it  would 
be  impossible  to  prevent  the  march  without  bloodshed,  proposed 
to  the  directory  to  legalize  and  control  it.  The  directory,  how- 
ever, stood  firmly  for  repression,  forced  the  mayor  to  instruct 
the  commandants  to  this  effect,  and  to  send  police  to  the 
gathering  places.  These  officers  made  every  peaceful  effort  to 
prevent  the  procession  and  when  their  efforts  proved  fruitless, 
the  mayor  and  the  municipal  council,  on  the  advice  of  the  com- 
mandants, voted  to  legalize  the  march  and  give  it  leadership, 
hoping  thus  to  render  it  harmless.  The  government,  acting 
through  the  minister  of  the  interior,  stood  with  the  directory  in 
its  effort  to  prevent  the  movement  at  any  cost.  The  majority  of 
the  members  of  the  legislative  assembly  were  in  sympathy  with 


123  The  feeling  in  the  faubourgs  is  expressed  in  such  pamphlets  as  Grande 
discourse  pronouncee  par  le  patriote  Gouchon  and  Preuves  evidentes  des 
trahisons  de  I'etat-major. 

326 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  131 

the  demonstration.  The  silence  of  that  body  that  followed  the 
reading  of  the  directory's  decree  on  June  19  indicated  this.  The 
debates  show  an  unwillingness  to  condemn  the  citizens,  a  sym- 
pathy with  the  movement  and  resentment  when  the  people's 
motives  were  questioned  or  when  the  king  was  said  to  be  in 
danger.  The  national  guard  was  divided  in  its  sympathy.  Sev- 
eral of  its  commandants  were  leaders  of  the  movement  and  the 
general  commandant  was  wholly  inactive.  Some  of  the  guards 
expressed  themselves  as  unwilling  to  fire  on  the  people.  Under 
these  circumstances,  it  seemed  impossible  to  prevent  the  demon- 
stration. 

The  plan  of  the  faubourgs  was  to  present  petitions  to  the 
assembly  and  to  the  king  and  to  combine  this  act  with  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  oath  of  the  tennis  court  by  planting  a  liberty  tree. 
The  plan  was  not  well  formed  and  its  execution  was  a  good  deal 
of  an  accident.  The  tree  was  planted,  but  not  where  it  was  in- 
tended. The  petition  to  the  assembly  had  been  drawn  up  in  the 
faubourgs.  It  voiced  the  fears  of  the  people,  charging  plots  and 
conspiracies,  appealed  to  the  assembly  for  protection  of  their 
liberties,  advocated  resistance  to  oppression  as  expressed  in  article 
two  of  the  declaration  of  rights  and  threatened  tyrants  with  the 
vengeance  of  the  men  of  the  I4th  of  July.  It  complained  of  the 
dismissal  of  the  patriotic  'ministers,  the  inaction  of  the  armies  and 
the  delays  of  the  high  national  courts,  but  made  no  mention  of 
the  king's  vetoes.  Whether  this  omission  was  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  petition  was  drawn  up  before  the  vetoes  were  officially  an- 
nounced or  whether  the  framers  of  the  petition  were  less  con- 
cerned with  the  vetoes  than  they  were  with  the  recall  of  the 
ministers,  is  not  clear.  Possibly  the  demand  for  the  withdrawal  of 
the  vetoes  was  reserved  for  the  petition  to  the  king,  but  of  this 
petition  we  have  no  record.  However  that  may  be,  the  determina- 
tion that  the  king  should  hear  the  wishes  of  the  people  on  both 
of  these  questions  was  evident  and  was  successfully  carried  out 
when  the  crowd  entered  the  chateau. 

Here  the  demand  for  the  recall  of  the  ministers  and  for  the  with- 
drawal of  the  vetoes  was  insistent.  The  distrust  of  the  king  was 
pronounced  and  the  warning  that  something  would  be  done,  that 

327 


132  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

he  would  even  be  dethroned,  if  he  did  not  change  his  attitude 
toward  the  revolution,  was  clearly  voiced.  The  crowd  withdrew 
from  the  Tuileries  only  when  urged  by  Petion  to  allow  the  king 
to  decide  freely  concerning  the  demands  made  upon  him  and  when 
assured  that  he  would  "  acquiesce  in  the  manifest  desire  of  the 
people."  The  demands  were  not  withdrawn.  The  people  even 
threatened  to  return,  if  the  king  did  not  yield  to  their  wishes; 
he  was  simply  given  time  in  which  to  act.  Should  he  persist  in 
his  duplicity,  should  he  refuse  to  recall  the  ministers  and  with- 
draw his  vetoes,  a  second  and  more  serious  uprising,  an  uprising 
that  would  cost  him  his  throne  seemed  inevitable.  The  affair 
of  June  20  was  not,  then,  a  wild  outbreak  of  unreasoning  popular 
fury,  but  a  demonstration  of  the  political  intelligence  of  the  resi- 
dents of  the  faubourgs  of  Paris,  of  their  determination  to  put 
an  end  to  a  situation  that  had  already  lasted  too  long.  On  that 
day  Louis  XVI  received  his  last  opportunity  to  abandon  his  policy 
of  duplicity  and  frankly  accept  the  revolution.  He  failed  to  under- 
stand and  on  August  10  the  men  of  the  faubourgs  kept  their 
promise,  returned  to  the  Tuileries,  forced  the  suspension  of  the 
king  and  saved  France  from  the  invading  armies.  The  days  of 
June  20  and  August  10,  1792  are  inseparable  and  are  no  less  sig- 
nificant than  that  of  July  14, 


824  That  the  significance  of  this  day  was  clearly  understood  by  the  Rus- 
sian government  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  diplomatic  relations  were  broken 
off  with  France  because  of  it.  On  July  19,  Catharine  II  sent  a  note  of 
dismissal  to  M.  Genet,  charge  des  affaires  de  France.  Relations  were  not 
to  be  renewed  until  the  king  of  France  should  be  reinstated  in  his  rights 
and  prerogatives.  Catharine  understood  that  the  events  of  June  20  were  a 
menace  to  all  royalty.  In  a  letter  to  Grimm,  August  13,  1792,  she  said  so 
and  explained  her  reasons  for  dismissing  Genet.  Recueil  des  instructions 
donnes  aux  ambassadeurs  et  ministres  de  France,  II,  530,  536.  The  royalists 
throughout  France  felt  the  significance  of  the  day  also  and  expressed  their 
abhorrence  in  pamphlets  and  addresses  to  the  king  on  the  following  days. 
See-  Addresse  au  roi  apres  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792;  Au  roi;  Aux 
citoyens  amis  de  la  constitution  par  les  federes ;  De  I'affreuse  conspiration 
qui  vient  d'etre  decouverte  par  des  members  de  I'assemblee  nationale; 
Description  de  la  fete  civique  donnee  au  roi;  Lettre  au  roi  presente  par 
ses  fideles  sujets,  signed  P.  M.  D.  V. ;  Paroles  d'un  vrai  Franc,ais. 


328 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  133 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

I.    SOURCES 

A.  MANUSCRIPT.    ARCHIVES  NATIONALES 

1.  Ci85,  No.  526:  Terrier,  Letter  to  Louis  XVI,  eight  o'clock,  June  20, 

1792. 

2.  C222,  No.  i6om:   (i)   Bourcet,  Letter  to  the  king,  July  9,  1792;    (2) 

Montjourdain,  commandant  with  the  prince  royal,  report  eleven- 
thirty  p.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (3)  Tourzelle,  Mme.,  Recit  de  se  qui  s'est 
passe  a  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  June  22,  1792. 

3.  F3688:  Correspondence  of  the  minister  of  the  interior,     (i)  The  Di- 

rectory to  Terrier,  June  20,  1792;  (2)  Terrier  to  the  committee  of 
twelve,  June  22,  1792;  (3)  Roederer  to  Terrier,  June  26,  1792. 

4.  1^4387:   Police  reports,    (i)    Minot,  June  20,   1792;    (2)    Niquille  and 

Gautier  to  the  police,  ten-thirty  a.  m.,  June  22,  1792;  (3)  Police 
report  on  the  Chevaliers  du  poignard,  June  20,  1792.  (Unsigned.) 

5.  1^4390*:  Certificates  concerning  events  in  the  chateau,  June  20,  1792, 

made  by  (i)  Aclocq,  July  15,  1792;  (2)  D'Hervilly,  July  16,  1792; 
(3)  Mandat,  July  15,  1792. 

6.  1^4590:  (i)  Petion's  letter  to  the  president  of  the  committee  of  serveil- 

lance  of  the  national  assembly,  June  20,  1792;  (2)  Decree  of  the 
section  of  the  Tuileries,- June  28,  1792. 

7.  FT4774™.     A  group  of  letters  consisting  chiefly  of  correspondence  be- 

tween the  mayor  of  Paris  and  other  officials:  (i)  Petion  to  the 
commandant  Romainvilliers,  June  18,  1792;  (2)  Petion  to  Dumont, 
commissioner  of  police  of  the  section  Montreuil,  June  10,  1792;  (3) 
Petion  to  Sergent,  five  a.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (4)  Petion  to  the  com- 
mandant, ten  p.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (5)  Alexander  to  Petion,  June 
20,  1792;  (6)  Laffond  to  Petion  and  municipal  officers,  one  forty-five 
p.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (7)  Longchamp  to  Petion,  June  20,  1792;  (8) 
Poullenot  to  Petion,  June  23,  1792;  (9)  Renaud,  commandant  of 
Saint-Marcel,  to  Petion,  June  20,  1792;  (10)  Roederer  to  Petion, 
June  20,  1792;  (n)  Terrier  to  the  Directory,  June  20,  1792. 

8.  W  ib.  251    (Dossier  Soltho  Douglas).     Police  reports,     (i)   Observa- 

tions du  19  juin,  1792;  (2)  Observations  du  20  juin,  1792;  (3)  Ob- 
servations du  21  juin,  1792.  These  are  all  signed  Soltho  Douglas. 


329 


134  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

B.  PRINTED 
i.    Collections.    Documents  and  Correspondence 

a.  Proclamation  du  roi  et  recueil  de  pieces  sur  les  evenements  du  vingt 
juin,  1792.  This  volume  was  published  by  order  of  the  directory  of 
the  department  and  consists  of  two  parts. 

(1)  Part   I,   Proclamation   du   roi   et   recueil   de   pieces   relatives   a 

I'arrete  du  conseil  du  departement  du  6  juillet,  1792,  concernant 
le  maire  et  le  procureur  de  la  commune  de  Paris,  Paris, 
d'imprimerie  royale,  1792.  It  contains  four  documents  which 
relate  to  the  suspension  of  the  mayor  and  the  prosecuting  at- 
torney of  the  commune  from  their  functions.  They  are:  (a) 
Proclamation  du  roi  concernant  I'arrete  du  conseil  du  departe- 
ment du  6  juillet,  qui  suspend  provisoirement  le  maire  et  le 
procureur  de  la  commune  de  Paris,  du  n  juillet,  1792.  (b) 
L'arrete  du  conseil  du  departement  du  6  juillet,  1792.  (c) 
Rapport  et  conclusion  du  procureur  general-syndic  du  departe- 
ment de  Paris,  relativement  aux  evenements  du  20  juin;  lu  au 
conseil  du  departement  le  6  juillet,  1792.  (d)  Extrait  des  regis- 
ters du  conseil  du  departement.  Proces-verbal  de  la  seance  du 
conseil  du  vendredi  6  juillet,  1792. 

(2)  Part  II  is  entitled  Pieces  justificative s  sur  les  evenements  du  vingt 

juin,  1792.  This  is  paged  separately  and  contains  94  pages.  It 
consists  of  letters,  declarations,  reports  and  proces-verbaux  of 
officers  as  follows:  (a)  Letters,  i' '.  Copie  de  la  lettre  ecrite  au 
procureur-general  syndic  du  departement,  par  le  maire  de  Paris, 
18  juin,  1792.  No.  I.  Also  reproduced  in  Revue  retrospective, 
2.  serie,  I,  162.  2'.  Copie  du  lettre  addresse  au  directoire,  le 
20  juin  a  minuit,  per  MM.  les  maires  et  officiers  municipaux  au 
departement  de  Paris.  No.  II.  Printed  in  Ternaux,  I,  145,  and 
in  Arch,  parl.,  XLV,  441.  3'.  Copie  de  la  lettre  ecrite  par  M. 
Petion  a  M.  Roederer,  le  20  juin,  1792,  5  heures  du  matin. 
Original  in  Arch  nat.,  1^4774™.  No.  III.  4'.  Copie  de  la  lettre 
ecrite  aux  maire  et  officiers  municipaux,  administrateurs  de 
police,  par  le  directoire  du  departement,  20  juin,  1792,  a  cinq 
heures  du  matin.  Also  found  in  Revue  retrospective,  2  serie, 
166,  and  Arch,  parl.,  XLV,  442.  No.  IV.  5'.  Copie  de  la  lettre 
ecrite  au  commandant  generale  de  la  garde  nationale,  par  le 
directoire  du  departement  de  Paris,  20  juin,  1792,  a  cinq  heures 
et  demi  du  matin.  Also  in  Revue  retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  167. 
No.  V.  6'.  Copie  de  la  lettre  ecrite  au  ministre  de  1'interieur, 
par  le  directoire  du  departement  de  Paris,  20  juin,  1792,  a  six 
heures  du  matin.  Also  found  in  Revue  retrospective,  2  serie, 
I,  167,  and  Arch,  parl,  XLV,  441.  No.  VI.  7'.  Copie  de  la 

330 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  135 

lettre  du  ministre  de  1'interieur  au  directoire  du  departement 
du  20  juin,  1792.  Found  also  in  Rapport  du  ministre  de 
1'interieur,  where  it  is  dated  nine  o'clock  a.  m.  Also  in  Arch, 
parl,  XLV,  442.  No.  VIII.  (b)  Reports,  i'.  Rapport  que 
fait  M.  de  Romainvilliers,  commandant-general,  des  faits  qui 
sont  passes  dans  la  malheureuse  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  et 
journees  antecedentes.  No.  XV.  Addition  au  rapport  que  le 
commandant-general  a  eu  1'honneur  de  presenter  au  departe- 
ment. No.  XXXI.  Printed  also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  147,  and  in 
Revue  retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  214.  2'.  Rapport  du  chef  de  la 
deuxieme  legion,  a  MM.  les  administrateurs  du  departement, 
sur  1'ordre  qu'il  en  a  regu  concernant  1'affaire  arrivee  au  chateau 
le  20  juin,  1792  (Aclocq).  No.  XVI.  3'.  Rapport  de  Terrier  au 
directoire  du  departement  concernant  1'ouverture  de  la  porte  de 
la  cour  royale,  26  juin,  1792.  No.  XVIII.  Printed  in  Revue 
retrospective,  2e  serie,  I,  202.  4'.  Rapport  de  1'evenement  ar- 
rivee au  chateau  des  Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792.  Signed  by 
Lagarde,  adjutant-general  de  la  4°  legion.  No.  XIX.  5'. 
fivenements  du  20  juin,  1792,  signed  Carle,  ist  lieutenant  colonel, 
30th  division.  No.  XXI.  6'.  fivenements  de  la  journee  du 
mercredi  20  juin,  1792,  signed  Rulhiere,  Col.  29th  division  of 
Nat.  guards.  No.  XXIV.  7'.  Rapport  de  Pierre  Moiteaux, 
gendarme  of  the  29th  division  of  Nat.  gendarmerie.  No.  XXV. 
8'.  Rapport  de  M.  Lassus,  fivenements  de  la  journee  du  20  juin, 
1792  (ist  Captain  of  29th  division  of  Nat.  gendarmerie).  No. 
XXVI.  9'.  Rapport  de  Louis  Marotte,  adjutant  (of  29th  divi- 
sion of  Nat.  gendarmerie).  No.  XXVII.  10'.  Rapport  de  Jean 
Foret  (gendarme,  29th  division  of  Nat.  gendarmerie).  No. 
XXVIII.  11'.  Copie  du  rapport  du  chef  de  la  quatrieme 
legion,  sur  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  signed  Mandat.  No. 
XXXIV.  12'.  Rapport  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  dans  le  bataillon  du 
Val-de-Grace  et  conduit  des  deux  commandants  de  ce  bataillon, 
la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  avec  les  pieces  justificatives  a 
1'appui,  certificates  veritables  par  M.  Saint-Prix,  commandant 
en  chef.  No.  XXXV.  ,  13'.  Rapport  de  Pinon  (chef  du  5th 
legion).  No.  XXXVI.  (c)  Declarations,  i'.  Declaration  de 
Leclerq  (commandant  en  chef,  4th  bataillon,  5th  legion).  No. 
VII.  Also  in  Revue  retrospective,  2e  serie,  I,  169.  2'.  Declara- 
tion du  commandant  du  deuxieme  bataillon  de  la  quatrieme 
legion  et  plusieurs  grenadiers  et  volontaires  du  meme  bataillon 
(signed  Perre,  Berger,  Blouet,  Sallier,  Stadel,  Lesecq,  Duhaviel 
and  Calame).  No.  X.  3'.  Declaration  du  Sieur  Bidault  le 
jeune.  No.  XI.  Also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  162,  and  Revue 
retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  205.  4'.  Declaration  du  sieur  Lecrosnier, 

331 


136  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

negociant  grenadier  du  bataillon  de  Saint-Opportune.  No.  XII. 
Also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  163,  and  Revue  retrospective,  2*  serie, 
I,  205.  5'.  Declaration  du  sieur  Gosse,  grenadier  voluntaire  du 
bataillon  de  Saint-Opportune.  No.  XIII.  Also  in  Hist.  parL, 
XV,  163,  and  Revue  retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  210.  6'.  Copie  de 
la  declaration  de  M.  Guibout,  grenadier  du  bataillon  de  Saint- 
Opportune.  No.  XIV.  Also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  164,  and  Revue 
retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  211.  7'.  A  messieurs  du  directoire  du 
departement  de  Paris,  signed  Jaladon  volunteer,  4"  bataillon, 
1st  legion.  No.  XVII.  Also  in  archives  of  the  ministry  of 
justice.  8'.  A  messieurs  composant  le  directoire  du  departement 
de  Paris,  signed  Maserey.  No.  XXIII.  9'.  Declaration  du 
chef  de  la  sixieme  legion  de  la  garde  nationale  Parisienne, 
signed  LaChesnaye.  No.  XXIX.  10'.  Declaration  faite  a  MM. 
du  directoire  du  departement  de  Paris  par  Leclerc,  adjutant 
general  de  la  premiere  legion  de  la  garde  nationale  Parisienne 
sur  le  fait  dont  il  a  ete  temoin  dans  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792. 
No.  XXX.  11'.  Declaration  de  Pierre  Joseph  Bron,  Suisse  de  la 
Porte  Royale.  No.  XXXII.  12'.  Declaration  du  Sieur  Des- 
mousseaux  (Substitute  of  the  Procureur-syndic  of  the  com- 
mune). No.  XXXIII.  13'.  Declaration  du  Saint- Fontaine 
(volunteer  of  the  8th  battalion  of  the  2d  legion).  No.  XXXVII. 
14'.  Declaration  regue  par  le  juge  de  paix  de  la  section  du  Roi 
de  Sicile,  signed  separately  by  Lareynie,  Turot,  Mussey  and 
one  by  Cuvillier,  Chauvreau,  Corps,  Ballin  and  another  by  Le- 
grand.  No.  XXXVII.  Lareynie's  declaration  is  found  also 
in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  116.  (d)  Proces-verbaux.  i'.  Section  de 
Montreuil,  Proces-verbal  de  la  protestation  de  MM.  Bonneau 
et  Savin,  commandants  du  bataillon  de  Saint-Marguerite.  No. 
IX.  Also  in  Revue  retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  175.  2'.  Extrait  du 
registre  des  deliberations  du  corps  municipal  du  20  juin,  1792, 
neuf  heures  du  matin.  No.  XX.  Also  found  in  Compte 
rendu,  7. 

b.  Compte  rendu  par  M.  le  maire  et  proces-verbaux  dresses  par  les  officiers 
municipaux,  sur  les  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792.  Reimprimes  par 
ordre  du  corps  municipal,  Paris,  1792.  This  collection  contains  the 
following  documents:  (i)  Decrees,  (a)  Arrete  du  corps  municipal 
8  juillet,  1792.  (b)  Arrete  du  conseil  general  de  la  commune,  16 
juin,  1792.  Also  in  Ternaux,  I,  137.  (c)  Arrete  du  directoire  du 
departement,  19  juin,  1792.  Also  in  Rapport  du  ministre  de  I'in- 
terieur  a  I'assemblee  nationale  sur  les  precautions  prises  relative- 
ment  aux  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792.  (d)  Arrete  du  corps  mu- 
nicipal, 20  juin,  1792.  Also  in  Proclamation  du  roi  et  recueil  de 
pieces.  (2)  Reports  of  municipal  officers,  (a)  Conduite  tenue  par 

332 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  137 

M.  le  maire  de  Paris  a  1'occasion  des  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792. 
Also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  170.  (b)  Proces-verbal  dresse  le  20  juin, 
1792,  par  MM.  Mouchet,  Guiard  et  Thomas,  officiers  municipaux. 
Also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  124,  and  Revue  retrospective,  2e  serie,  I, 
172.  (c)  Proces-verbal  dresse  le  20  juin,  1792,  par  MM.  Mouchet 
et  Boucher-Saint-Sauveur,  officiers  municipaux.  (d)  Proces-verbal 
dresse  le  20  juin,  1792,  par  M.  Mouchet.  (e)  Proces-verbal  dresse 
sur  les  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792,  par  M.  Patris,  officier  muncipal. 
(f)  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M.  Perron,  officier  municipal  sur  les 
evenements  du  20  juin,  1792.  Also  in  Hist,  parl.,  XV,  120,  and  in 
Revue  retrospective,  2  serie,  I,  170.  (g)  Proces-verbal  dresse  sur 
les  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792,  par  M.  Sergent,  administrates  au 
departement  de  la  police,  (h)  Proces-verbal  dresse  le  20  juin,  1792, 
par  M.  Boucher-Rene,  officier  municipal,  (i)  Proces-verbal  dresse 
par  M.  Borie,  officier  municipal,  sur  les  evenements  du  20  juin, 
1792.  (j)  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  Hu,  officier  municipal,  sur  les 
evenements  du  20  juin,  1792.  (k)  Proces-verbal  dresse  par  M. 
Champion,  officier  municipal,  sur  les  evenements  du  20  juin,  1792. 
(i)  Declaration  de  M.  J.  J.  Leroux,  sur  les  evenements  du  20  juin, 
1792.  (m)  Declaration  de  M.  Jallier,  officier  municipal  sur  la 
journee  du  20  juin,  1792. 

c.  Revue  retrospective,  2e  serie,  I,  1835.     (i)   Letter  from  Petion's  office 

in  his  absence  to  Roederer,  June  8,  1792;  (2)  Letter  of  Terrier  to 
the  directory,  eleven  a.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (3)  Deliberations  of  the 
directory,  11:30  p.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (4)  Letter  of  Terrier  to  the 
directory,  up.  m.,  June  20,  1792;  (5)  Letter  of  the  commissioners 
to  Roederer,  two  o'clock,  June  30,  1792;  (6)  Letter  of  Roederer  to 
Manuel,  two-thirty  o'clock,  June  30,  1792;  (7)  Letter  of  Roederer 
to  the  commissioners,  nine  o'clock,  June  30,  1792 ;  (8)  Rapport  fait 
au  conseil  du  departement  par  MM.  Gamier,  Levillard  et  Demantort, 
commissioners  named  by  the  council  of  the  department  to  report  on 
June  20,  1792. 

d.  Aulard,  F.  A.     La  societe  des  Jacobins,  recueil  de  documents  pour 

I'histoire  du  club  des  Jacobins  de  Paris.    5  vols.,  Paris,  1892. 

e.  Brette,  Armand.     Recueil  de  documents  relatifs  a  la  convocation  des 

etats  generaux  de  1789.    3  vols.,  Paris,  1894. 

/.  Rambaud,  A.  Recueil  des  instructions  donnees  aux  ambassadeurs  et 
ministers  de  France  depuis  les  traites  de  Westphalie  jusqu'a  la 
revolution  frangaise,  1749-1789.  Paris,  1890. 

g.  Rapport  du  ministre  de  I'interieur  a  I'assemblee  nationale  sur  les  pre- 
cautions prises  relativement  aux  evenements  du  20  juin.  This  re- 
port was  made  June  21  st  and  contains  the  following  letters  support- 
ing it:  (i)  Letter  of  Terrier  to  the  directory,  2:30  p.  m.,  June  19, 
1792.  (2)  Letter  of  the  directory  to  Terrier,  June  19, 1792.  (3)  Letter 

333 


138  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

of  the  directory  to  Terrier,  7  a.  m.,  June  20,  1792.  (4)  Letter  of  Ter- 
rier to  the  directory,  8  a.  m.,  June  20,  1792.  These  four  letters  are 
also  found  in  Revue  retrospective,  2e  serie,  I,  163  ff.,  and  in  Arch, 
parl.  (5)  Letter  of  Terrier  to  the  directory,  8  a.  m.,  June  20,  1792 
(second  letter).  (6)  Letter  of  directory  to  Terrier,  9  a.  m.,  June 
20,  1792.  (7)  Letter  of  Terrier  to  directory,  9  a.  m.,  June  20,  1792. 
Also  found  in  Proclamation  du  roi  et  recueil  de  pieces,  No.  VIII. 
h.  Ternaux,  I,  404. 

(i)  Extrait  du  proces-verbal  des  declarations  regues  par  le  juge  de 
paix  de  la  section  des  Tuileries  sur  la  journee  du  20  juin,  date 
au  commencement  du  25  juin,  1792.  (2)  Rapport  d'Alexandre. 
(3)  Extrait  du  rapport  fait  par  Santerre  au  maire.  (4) 
Ouverture  de  la  porte  de  la  cour  royale,  Laporte  to  Terrier, 
June  27,  1792.  Original  in  Archives  nationales,  F736881. 

2.   Sources  Independently  Printed 

a.  DOCUMENTS. 

(1)  Proces-verbal  de  I'assemblee  nationale  imprime  par  son   ordre. 

Paris,  1792. 

(2)  Guingerlot.     Declaration  of  Guingerlot,  Lieut.  Col.  30  Div.  Gen- 

darmerie, June  25.  Also  found  in  Archives  historiques,  artis- 
tiques  et  litteraires,  II,  365,  Paris,  Etienne  Charavay.  Original 
in  Arch,  nat.,  1^3390.  Guingerlot  was  on  the  scene  and  played 
an  important  role  on  June  20.  This  text  is  only  a  rough  draft 
of  his  deposition. 

(3)  Rougeville,  M.  de.     Deposition  sur  les  tristes  evenements  de  la 

journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  comme  temoin  oculaire  et  reflexions 
politiques  par  M.  de  Rougeville,  Lieut.  Col.  de  Cavalrie  Cheva- 
lier des  ordres  militaires,  St.  Louis  et  de  Cincinnatus.  Original 
in  Arch,  nat.,  C  222,  No.  i6o152. 

(4)  L'almanach  royal  de  1792. 

b.  CORRESPONDENCE  AND  JOURNALS. 

(1)  Blanc-Gilli.      Lettre    d'un    depute    de    I'assemblee    nationale    au 

departement  des  Bouches-du-Rhone  au  sujet  de  I'attentat  et  des 
des  ordres  commis  au  chateau  des  Tuileries,  le  20  juin.  Paris, 
21  juin,  1792.  The  original  is  in  the  Archives  nationales, 
AD1iO2.  Blanc-Gilli  was  an  eye  witness  of  the  events  he  de- 
scribes and  wrote  June  21.  The  letter  is  published  in  pamphlet 
form. 

(2)  Flammermont,  Jules.    Negociations  secretes  de  Louis  XVI  et  du 

baron  de  Breteuil  avec  la  cour  de  Berlin  (decembre  1791- 
juillet  1792}.  Paris,  1885. 

334 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792          139 

(3)  Geraud,  Edmond.     Journal  d'un  etudiant  pendant  la  revolution, 

1789-1793.     Chalmann  Levy,  Editor,  1890. 

(4)  Glagau,  Hans.     Die  franzosische  Legislative  und  der  Ursprung 

der  Revolutionskriege,  1791-1792.  Berlin,  1896,  p.  318-360. 
i'.  Mercy  an  Kaunitz,  Brussels,  den  16  Mai,  1792;  2'.  Mercy  an 
Katmitz,  Brussels,  den  30  Mai,  1792;  3'.  Pellenc  an  LaMarck, 
Paris,  Ende  Mai,  1792;  4'.  Remarques  sur  1'etat  actuel  du 
moment.  (Diese  Bemerkungen  sind  von  Pellenc  verfasst.  Sie 
tragen  kein  datum.  Am  13  Juni  iibersandte  Mercy  sie  an  den 
Fursten  Kaunitz.  Editor's  note.)  5'.  Pellenc  an  LaMarck, 
Paris,  den  24  Juni,  1792;  6'.  Aus  einem  Schreiben  Mercys  an 
Kaunitz,  Briissel,  den  27"  Juni,  1792;  7'.  Mercy  an  Kaunitz, 
Briissel,  den  2  Juli,  1792;  8'.  Abbe  Louis  an  Mercy,  Paris,  den 
26  Juni,  1792;  9'.  Pellenc  an  LaMarck,  Paris,  den  29  Juni,  1792; 
10'.  Pellenc  an  LaMarck,  Paris,  den  30  Juni,  1792;  n'.  Pellenc 
an  LaMarck,  Paris,  den  13-15  Juli,  1792. 

(5)  Goupilleau,   Ph-Ch-Ai.     Lettre  de   depute  de  la   Vendee  a  I'as- 

semblee  legislative,  a  la  societe  populaire  de  Saint-Vincent  de 
Nantes,  Fontenay,  1849.  Goupilleau  was  an  eye  witness  of  and 
an  actor  in  the  events  of  June  20.  He  wrote  his  account  at 
eleven  o'clock  the  same  night.  Published  in  pamphlet  form 
and  found  in  Bibliotheque  de  la  Ville  de  Paris. 

(6)  Journal  d'une  bourgeoise  pendant  la  revolution  1791-1793.    Pub- 

liee  par  son  petit- fils,  Edouard  Lockroy,  Paris,  1881.  These 
letters  were  written  by  a  woman  to  her  son  and  to  her  husband. 
They  were  not  written  for  publication.  She  was  present  in  the 
assembly  on  June  20  and  sent  her  servant  to  the  Tuileries  to 
see  what  passed  there. 

(7)  Klinckowstrom,  Baron  R.  M.  de.    Le  comte  de  Fersen  et  la  cour 

de  France.  Extraits  des  papiers  du  grand  marechal  de  Suede, 
comte  Jean  Axel  de  Fersen.  2  vols.,  Paris,  1878.  Vol.  II,  p. 
3O3,  307:  i'.  Bulletin  avec  details  sur  ce  qui  s'est  passe  aux 
Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792.  (D'apres  Toriginal  envoye  par  le 
charge  d'affaires  de  Suede  a  Paris,  Sr.  Bergstedt,  au  comte  de 
Fersen;  dans  les  papiers  de  ce  dernier.)  2'.  Bulletin  de  ce  qui 
s'est  passe  aux  Tuileries  le  20  juin,  1792,  Paris,  ce  21  juin, 
1792.  (D'apres  une  lettre  en  chiffre  d'une  personne  temoin 
oculaire.  La  lettre  a  etc  dechiffree  par  un  secretaire  du  comte 
de  Fersen.) 

(8)  La  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  recontee  par  un  temoin.     Extrait 

d'une  lettre  ecrite  de  Paris  en  datte  du  21  juin  a  Dupin  et  fils  a 
Montpellier,  in  Revue  historique  de  la  revolution  frangaise,  Vol. 
II,  597- 

(9)  Lescure,  Correspondance  secrete  incdite  sur  Louis  XVI,  Marie- 

335 


140  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

Antoinette,  la  cour  et  la  ville  de  1777-1792.  Publiee  d'apres 
les  manuscrits  de  la  bibliotheque  imperiale  de  Saint-Petersbourg, 
2  vols.,  Paris,  1866.  The  author  is  unknown,  but  was  evidently 
a  person  familiar  with  the  political  and  diplomatic  affairs  of 
the  court.  The  manuscript  is  found  in  Saint  Petersburg 
marked  F.  51,  Bulletins  de  Versailles,  1777-1792. 

(10)  Lindet,  Thomas.  Correspondance  pendant  la  constituante  et  la 
legislative  (1789-1792).  Published  by  Amand  Montier,  Paris, 

1899- 

(n)  Mirabeau  et  Le  Comte  de  La  Marck.  Correspondance  pendant 
les  annees  1789,  1790,  et  1791,  recueillie,  mise  en  ordre  et  publiee 
par  M.  Ad.  de  Bacourt,  3  vols.,  Paris,  1851.  i'.  Le  comte  de 
Montmorin  au  comte  de  la  Marck,  Paris,  22  mai,  1792;  2'.  Le 
comte  de  Montmorin  au  comte  de  la  Marck,  Paris,  19  juin, 
1792;  3'.  Le  comte  de  Montmorin  au  comte  de  la  Marck,  Paris, 
21  juin,  1792. 

(12)  Morris,  Gouverneur.    Diary  and  Letters.    Edited  by  Anne  Gary 

Morris,  2  vols.,  New  York,  1888. 

(13)  A  Residence  in  Prance  during  the  Years  1792,  1793,  1794,  *795'. 

Described  in  a  Series  of  Letters  front  an  English  Lady  with 
General  and  Incidental  Remarks  of  the  French  Character  and 
Manners.  Ed.  by  John  Gifford,  Esq. 

(14)  Revue  d'histoire  moderne  et  contemporaine,  Nov.,  1908,  contains: 

i'.  Fidele  expose  d'un  evenement  qui  a  garanti  d'une  mort 
imminente  la  vie  de  S.  A.  R.  Madame  la  Duchesse  d'Angouleme. 
Letter  of  J.  B.  Mosneron  to  Louis  XVIII,  May  19,  1814;  2'. 
Lettre  du  comte  Bigot  de  Preameneu  au  comte  de  Pastoret,  Oct. 
8,  1817,  XI,  116. 

(15)  Vivenot,  Alfred  Ritter  von.    Quellensur  Geschichte  der  deutschen 

Kaiserpolitik  Oesterreichs  wdhrend  der  franzosischen  Revolu- 
tionskriege,  1790-1801.  4  vols.,  Wien,  1873.  Vol.  II,  p.  58, 
contains :  i'.  Kaunitz  an  Mercy,  Wien,  den  26  Mai,  1792. 

c.   CONTEMPORARY  ACCOUNTS. 

(1)  Azema.    "Les  journees  du  20  juin  et  du  10  aout,  1792,  racontees 

par  Azema,  depute  de  1'Aude  a  la  legislative."  La  revolution 
franc,aise,  XXVII.  Azema  was  an  eye  witness  of  what  he  re- 
lates and  wrote  at  eleven  o'clock  on  the  evening  of  June  20th. 

(2)  Bourcet.    "  Relation  de  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  faite  par  un 

garde  nationale,  temoin  oculaire  "  in  Revolution  franc,aise,  XVII, 
72.  This  account  was  written  by  a  former  valet  de  chambre  of 
the  dauphin,  who  died  in  1798.  It  was  found  among  the  papers 
of  Mercy  in  the  archives  of  Vienna,  having  been  sent  by  Mercy 
to  Kaunitz  with  a  letter  dated  June  27,  1792.  It  gives  a  very 

336 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  141 

good  account  of  the  events  of  the  day  as  seen  by  one  who  stood 
beside  the  king  in  the  hall  through  which  the  crowd  passed. 
The  author,  however,  shows  prejudice  against  the  people  and 
great  devotion  to  the  king.  The  document  is  not  dated,  but 
was  evidently  written  before  June  27.  See  note  of  Flammer- 
mont,  Revolution  jranqaise,  XVII,  72. 

(3)  Young,  Arthur.     Travels  in  France  during  the  years  1787,  1788, 
1789,  4th  Edition,  London,  1892. 

(d)    PAMPHLETS. 

(1)  Addresse  au  roi  apres  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792.    Anonymous. 

Extremely  royalist  in  sentiment,  giving  nothing  of  value,  but 
praising  the  king  for  his  religious  fortitude  on  June  20. 

(2)  Au  roi.     Une   addresse  par  Sanois  ancien   aide-major  de  vos 

gardes  frangaises.  June  21.  One  of  the  royalist  addresses  sent 
to  the  king  expressing  horror  of  the  events  of  June  20.  Gives 
no  facts,  but  only  shows  sentiment. 

(3)  Aux  citoyens  amis  de  la  constitution  par  les  federes.    Anonymous. 

This  pamphlet  is  anti-Jacobin.  It  blames  the  Jacobins  for 
many  acts,  among  others  for  being  the  authors  of  June  20. 
Of  value  only  as  it  reflects  sentiment. 

(4)  De  I'affreuse   conspiration   qui  vient  d'etre   decouverte  par  des 

members  de  I'assemblee  nationale.  Complot  atroce  d'engorger 
les  deputes  patriotes  de  I'assemblee,  M.  Petion,  maire  de  Paris, 
les  membres  patriotes  de  la  municipality  du  departement  et  des 
sections  patriotiques.  Extreme  in  sentiment,  general  in  its 
accusations  and  gives  nothing  of  value. 

(5)  Description  de  la  -fete  civique  donnee  au  roi  dans  son  chateau  des 

Tuilleries  par  MM.  Petion  et  Santerre  juin  20,  1792.  Arch.  Nat., 
C222,  No.  i6o152.  An  anonymous  pamphlet  full  of  satire  and 
bitter  accusations.  Extremely  prejudiced,  charging  Petion, 
Manuel,  Santerre,  the  members  of  the  assembly  and  of  the 
directory  with  responsibility  for  the  events  of  June  20. 

(6)  Drouet.    Note  sur  les  evenements  de  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792, 

par  Charles  Frangois  Drouet,  Lieut,  de  chasseurs  dans  la  garde 
nationale.  This  writer  was  in  the  king's  apartments  June  20, 
1792,  but  wrote  his  account  twenty-four  years  later,  in  1816. 
He  relates  the  incidents  of  the  day,  but  the  account  is  full  of 
inaccuracies  and  misstatements.  He  claims  to  have  rendered 
to  the  king  certain  services  which  other  evidence  shows  he  did 
not  render. 

(7)  Gouchon.     Grande  discourse  pronouncee  par  le  patriote  Gouchon 

au  nom  des  citoyens  du  faubourg  Saint-Antoine  au  sujet  de  la 
journee  du  20  juin  et  pour  justifier  le  peuple  de  Paris.  Im- 

337 


142  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

primee  par  ordre  de  I'asscmblee  nationale  et  envoye  a  tons  les 
departements.  This  pamphlet  is  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  the 
writer  to  justify  himself  and  his  fellows  for  the  part  they  took 
on  June  20,  asserting  that  as  fathers  of  families,  citizens  and 
soldiers  they  were  right  in  what  they  did  because  of  the  oppres- 
sion and  plots  of  the  king  and  nobles.  He  applauds  the  as- 
sembly for  its  attitude. 

(8)  Joly.    Note  historique  sur  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  donnee  par 

le  Sr.  Joly  sergent  des  canonniers  de  la  section  du  faubourg 
du  Nord.  Written  at  Paris,  March  20,  1816.  Joly  was  a  guard 
in  the  king's  apartments  on  June  20.  He  is  strongly  royalist 
and,  like  Drouet,  claims  credit  for  services  which  he  did  not 
render.  His  memory  did  not  serve  him  well,  twenty-four  years 
after  the  events. 

(9)  Lamar,   Tabbe.     Les   loisirs   d'un    cure'  deplace    ou   les   acts   de 

I'eglise  constitutionelle,  tableau  historique  de  la  journee:  du  20 
juin  ou  le  triomphe  du  bonnet  rouge.  This  pamphlet  is  found 
in  a  collection  called  Pieces  sur  la  revolution,  journees  fameuses, 
Vol.  Ill,  1791  a  10  aout  1792.  Very  prejudiced  and  very  bitter 
in  its  tone.  Makes  sweeping  accusations  against  the  popular 
leaders  and  the  people  and  charges  them  with  crimes  which  the 
writer  does  not  prove.  He  calls  them  regicides,  bandits,  canni- 
bals, etc.  He  mentions  various  incidents  of  the  day.  Every 
statement  needs  to  be  carefully  controlled. 

(10)  Le  cri  de  la  douleur  ou  journee  du  20  juin  par  I'auteur  du  Domine 
salvem  fac  re  gem  (ex  trait  de  la  correspondance  politique  ou 
tableau  de  Paris  des  22  et  24  juin).  Paris.  Arch.  nat.  A.  D. 
102.  Bitter  in  tone,  royalist  in  sympathy,  it  makes  many  general 
and  specific  accusations  which  it  does  not  prove.  It  can  not  be 
relied  upon  for  statements  of  fact.  It  condemns  in  strong 
language  the  supposed  leaders  of  the  day,  particularly  the 
Girondins  and  Jacobins  in  the  assembly. 

(u)  P.  M.  D.  V.  Lettre  au  roi,  presente  par  ses  fideles  sujets  re- 
lativement  a  la  journee,  a  jamais  execrable,  du  20  juin,  I792> 
Signed  P.  M.  D.  V.  Another  of  the  anonymous  pamphlets 
which  is  of  no  value  in  giving  facts,  but  which  shows  royalist 
sentiment.  It  is  full  of  praise  for  the  king  and  condemnation 
of  the  people  for  June  20. 

(12)  Paroles  d'un  vrai  Frangais  apres  I'aff reuse  journee  du  20  juin. 

Anonymous.  This  is  royalist  and  extremely  bitter  in  its  attacks 
on  the  supposed  leaders  of  the  uprising.  It  gives  unstinted 
praise  to  the  king.  Is  of  no  value  except  to  reflect  sentiment. 

(13)  Preuves    evidentes    des    trahisons    de    I'etat-major    coupable    au 

premier  chef  du  crime  de  lese-nation;  et  fidelite  heroique  des  sec- 

338 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  143 

tions  et  des  soldats  patriotes.  Par  des  citoyens  des  faubourgs. 
A  Paris  de  I'imprimerie  de  la  Verite  emplacement  de  la  ci- 
devant  Bastille,  1792.  This  was  drawn  up  by  the  citizens  of  the 
faubourgs.  It  is  full  of  praise  for  the  leaders  of  the  people 
and  for  all  connected  with  the  cause  of  liberty.  It  accuses  the 
king  of  perfidy  and  the  directory  of  subservience  to  him.  It 
praises  Petion,  Danton,  Manuel,  Robespierre,  and  shows  the 
sentiment  in  the  faubourgs. 

(14)  Recit  exact  et  circonstancie  de  ce  qui  s'est  passe  au  chateau  des 

Tuilleries  le  mercredi  20  juin,  1792.  Paris,  imp.  de  J.  Gerouard. 
Extrait  de  la  Gazette  de  Paris.  The  editor  of  the  Gazette  de 
Paris  was  Durosoy.  He  says  that  for  this  account  he  followed 
the  notes  of  an  eye  witness,  who  was  at  the  king's  side.  The 
sentiment  is  markedly  royalist,  bitterly  accusing  the  people  of 
murderous  intentions.  It  is  extremely  prejudiced,  but  evidently 
the  account  of  an  eye  witness. 

(15)  Recit  generale  et  circonstancie  des  evenements  du  vingt  juin,  1792. 

Extrait  du  Courrier  des  83  departements.  The  original  news- 
paper published  by  Gorsas  bears  the  dates  June  22  and  24.  This 
account  is  full  and  accurate,  though  sympathy  with  the  move- 
ment is  clearly  seen.  Gorsas  was  an  eye  witness.  The  Nouvelle 
corres.pondance  politique,  XII,  I,  date  of  June  22,  1792,  a  royal- 
ist paper,  says  Gorsas  knows  everything  beforehand,  when  it  is 
a  question  of  an  uprising. 

NEWSPAPERS. 

(1)  Annales    patriotiques    et    litteraires    de    la    France,    et    affaires 

politiques  de  I'Europe ;  journal  libre,  par  une  societe  d'ecrivains 
patriotes,  dirige  par  M.  Mercier  et  par  M.  Carra,  un  des 
auteurs.  Nos.  CLII,  CLXXIII,  CLXXIV,  Du  Jeudi,  31  Mai, 
Jeudi  21  juin,  Vendredi  22  juin,  1792.  Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  249. 

(2)  Chronique  du  mois  ou  les  cahiers  patriotiques  de  M.  Claviere, 

19  juin,  20  juin,  1792.     Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  649. 

(3)  Chronique    de   Paris.      (Redigee   pour   la   partie    de    I'assemblee 

nationale  par  M.  J.  A.  N.  Condorcet.)     Daily.    No.  174,  Jeudi 

21  juin,  No.  1/5,  Vendredi  22  juin,  172.     Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  218. 

(4)  Corespondance  politique  des  veritables  amis  du  roi  et  de  la  patrie. 

No.  63.  Du  Jeudi  21  puin  et  du  Samedi  23  juin,  1792.  Bib.  nat, 
L2c.  661,  662.  Account  of  June  20  written  by  an  eye  witness. 

(5)  Gazette  de  France.    No.  86  and  87.    Du  Jeudi  21,  and  Vendredi 

22  juin,  779^.     Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  I. 

(6)  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale  ou  Journal  logographique.    Tome 

XXI,  1792.  Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  136.  This  journal  gives  the  fullest 
and  most  faithful  report  of  the  meetings  of  the  assembly  on 
June  20,  of  any  of  the  papers. 

339 


144  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

(7)  Journal  des  debats  et  des  decrets.    Nos.  266,  267,  268.    Bib.  nat, 

L2c.  147.  This  gives  a  full  account  of  the  meetings  of  the 
assembly. 

(8)  Journal  du  peuple,  par  Boyer.    No.  146.    Du  Lundi  25  juin,  1792. 

Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  665. 

(9)  Journal  royalist  par  Barruel  Beauvert.     Published   every  other 

day.  Nos.  3-7.  Du  Mercredi,  20,  Vendredi  22,  Dimanch  24, 
Mardi  26,  Jeudi  28,  juin,  1792.  Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  664.  The  account 
of  the  events  of  June  20  was  written  by  an  eye  witness. 

(10)  L'indicateur  ou  Journal  des  causes  et  des  effects.  Nos.  31,  32,  33, 
34,  35.  Mercredi  20,  Jeudi  21,  Vendredi  22,  Samdi  23,  juin, 
1792.  Daily. 

(u)  Le  mercure  universel.  Daily.  Du  jeudi  21  juin,  1792,  et  du 
vendredi,  22  juin,  1792. 

(12)  Le  patriote  frangais  (par  Brissot).    No.  1046.    Du  Jeudi  21  juin, 

1792.    Bib.  nat.,  L2c.  185. 

(13)  Le  thermometre  du  jour,  par  une  societe  de  gens  de  lettres,  amis 

de  la  constitution,  par  J.  A.  Dulaure  et  B.  Chaper,  Paris,  n 
aout  1792-25  aout  1793.  Jeudi  21,  et  Samdi  23  juin,  1792. 
Daily. 

(14)  Moniteur.    Reimpressions  de  I'ancien  Moniteur  depuis  la  reunion 

des  etats-generaux  jusqu'au  consulat  (mai  1789-novembre  1799}. 
Avec  des  notes.  31  vols.,  Paris,  1840-1847.  This  gives  a  report 
of  the  meetings  of  the  assembly  of  June  20,  but  not  so  faithful 
an  account  as  is  found  in  the  Journal  de  I'assemblee  nationale. 

(15*)  Nouvelle  correspondance  politique  ou  tableau  de  Paris.  Pour 
servir  de  suite  aux  LI  I  premiers  numeros  de  la  correspondance 
politique  des  veritables  amis  du  roi  et  de  la  patrie.  No.  XII, 
Du  Vendredi,  22  juin,  1792,  Du  Dimanche  24  juin,  1792.  Bib. 
Nat.,  L2c.  661,  662. 

(16)  Revolutions  de  Paris,  dediees  a  la  nation  et  au  district  des  Petits- 
Augustins.  Publiees  par  L.  Prudhomme,  a  I'epoque  du  12 
juillet,  1789.  Paris,  1792. 

(/)  MEMOIRES. 

(1)  Alexandre.     Extracts   in   Petites  histoires,   I   serie,   of   Frederic 

Masson  (Paris,  1910)  in  the  chapter  entitled  "  L'invasion  des 
Tuileries,  Le  20  juin,  1792."  The  manuscript  is  the  property 
of  M.  Masson.  The  portion  of  the  Memoires  relating  to  June 
20  was  written  later  than  the  account  contained  in  the  Rapport 
d' Alexandre  (Ternaux,  I,  404  ff.)  and  differs  from  it  in  some 
details.  Naturally  the  earlier  account  is  the  more  trustworthy. 

(2)  Campan,    Madame.      Memoires    sur    la    vie    privee    de    Marie- 

Antoinette,  3  vols.,  Paris,  1822. 

340 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  145 

(3)  Chaumette.    Memoires  sur  la  revolution  du  10  aout,  1792,  par  F. 

A.  Aulard,  Paris,  1893.  Chaumette  was  active  in  revolutionary 
affairs  from  1789  to  1794  and  very  influential.  He  was  pro- 
cureur  de  la  commune  in  the  latter  part  of  1792.  He  wrote  his 
memoires  before  the  middle  of  1793,  for  he  speaks  of  the 
Girondins  as  adversaries  yet  living  and  refers  to  Petion  as 
living  in  May,  1793.  (See  page  33.)  There  is  one  indication 
that  he  may  have  written  between  Aug.  10  and  Sept.  20,  1793. 
After  speaking  of  the  action  of  the  assembly,  Aug.  10,  he 
praised  it  as  worthy  of  the  people  it  represented  and  expressed 
a  wish  that  it  might  never  lessen  its  energy  (p.  64). 

(4)  Dumouriez.      La   vie   et   les   memoires   avec   des   notes   et   des 

eclair cissements  historiques,  par  MM.  Berville  et  Barriere. 
4  vols.,  Paris,  1822. 

(5)  Ferrieres,  Marquis  de.    Memoires,  3  vols.,  par  Berville  et  Bar- 

riere, Paris,  1821. 

(6)  Oelsner,  Charles  Englebert.    "  Fragments  de  ses  memoires  relatifs 

a  1'histoire  de  la  revolution  franchise,"  Revue  historique,  Vols. 
LXIII,  LXXXIII,  LXXXIV,  LXXXVII.  These  memoires  are 
published  with  notes  by  Alfred  Stern.  Oelsner  was  an  eye  wit- 
ness of  the  events  of  June  20. 

(7)  Paroy,  le  comte  de.     Memoires  du   comte   de  Paroy,  souvenirs 

d'un  defenseur  de  la  famille  royal  pendant  la  revolution 
(1789-1798}.  Publiees  par  Etienne  Charavay,  Paris,  1895.  This 
account  was  first  published  in  1836  by  Villenave  (in  the  Revue 
de  Paris},  who  owned  the  manuscript.  After  his  death,  Chara- 
vay bought  it.  Paroy  had  apartments  at  the  Tuileries.  He  was 
a  close  observer,  spent  much  time  in  the  gardens,  cafes,  and 
streets  of  Paris  and  in  the  evening  gave  an  account  to  the 
people  of  the  court  of  what  had  happened  in  these  places.  He 
was  in  the  Tuileries,  June  20,  both  in  the  apartments  of  the 
king  and  of  the  queen,  and  stood  guard  at  the  king's  door  all 
night  (pp.  300-303).  While  his  account  is  prejudiced  because 
of  his  enmity  to  the  revolution,  it  has  much  valuable  material 
of  a  personal  character.  See  the  introduction  by  Charavay. 

(8)  Roederer,  P.  L.     Chronique  de  cinquante  jours  du  20  juin  au  10 

aout,  Paris,  1832.  While  Roederer  was  an  actor  in  some  of  the 
events  of  June  20,  there  is  little  in  his  account  drawn  from  his 
own  independent  recollections.  He  wrote  at  least  thirty  years 
after  the  death  of  Louis  XVI.  (See  paragraph  one  of  his  intro- 
duction in  which  he  speaks  of  France  having  been  under  two 
different  regimes  of  fifteen  years  each  since  that  event.)  He 
made  use  of  the  published  documents  accessible  when  he  wrote, 
reconstructing  the  events  of  June  20  as  the  historian  who  has 
no  first  hand  knowledge  of  an  event  is  forced  to  do. 

341 


146  Laura  B.  Pfeiffer 

(9)  Roland,  Madame.  Memoires,  avec  une  notice  sur  sa  vie,  des 
notes  et  des  eclaircissements  historiques,  par  MM.  Berville  et 
Barrier e.  2  vols.,  Paris,  1827. 

(10)  Sergent-Marceau.  Notice  historique  sur  les  evenements  du  10 
aoiit,  1792,  et  des  20  et  21  juin  precedents.  This  account  was 
published  in  the  Revue  retrospective,  2e  serie,  III,  328  ff.  (1835). 
The  account  was  written  in  1828,  according  to  the  author's 
statements.  He  was  one  of  the  administrators  of  police  and 
took  a  very  active  part  in  the  events  of  June  20,  leaving  a  dec- 
laration giving  a  full  account  of  his  work  on  that  day.  It  is 
found  in  the  collection  published  by  the  municipality  under  the 
title  Compte  rendu,  1792.  The  Memoires  has  very  little  of  value 
for  June  20,  giving  chiefly  the  author's  interpretation  of  the 
uprising  as  seen  through  the  vista  of  the  years. 

(n)  Weber.  Memoires  concernant  Marie  Antoinette,  archiduchesse 
d'Autriche  et  reine  de  France  et  de  Navarre.  2  vols.,  Paris, 
1822.  Weber  reproduces  a  few  letters  of  eye  witnesses  describ- 
ing the  events  of  June  20. 

II.    SECONDARY  WORKS. 

1.  Aulard,  A.     Etudes  et  legons  sur  la  revolution  frangaise,  Quatrieme 

serie,  Paris,  1904. 

2.  Aulard,  A. :    Histoire  politique  de  la  revolution  frangaise,  Paris,  1901. 

3.  Aulard,  A. :    Les  republicans  et  les  democrats  depuis  le  massacre  du 

Champ  de  Mars  jusqu'a  la  journee  du  20  juin,  1792,  in  Revolution 
frangaise,  XXXV,  1898. 

4.  Berty,  Adolph.     Topographic  historique  du  vieux  Paris,  5  vols.,  Paris, 

1866. 

5.  Blanc,  Louis,  Histoire  de  la  revolution  frangaise,  15  vols.,  Nouvelle 

edition,  Paris,  1878. 

6.  Brette,  Armand,  Histoire  des  edifices  ou  ont  siege  les  assemblies  par- 

lementaires  de  la  revolution  frangaise  et  de  la  premiere  republique, 
Paris,  1902. 

7.  Cambridge  Modern  History,  Planned  by  Lord  Acton,  edited  by  A.  W. 

Ward,  G.  W.  Prothero  and  Stanley  Leathes,  Vol.  VIII,  The  French 
Revolution,  New  York. 

8.  Caron,  Pierre.    "  Le  tentative  de  centre-revolution  de  juin-juillet,  1789," 

in  Revue  d'histoire  moderne,  VIII,  5-34,  649-678. 

9.  Carro,  A.    Santerre,  general  de  la  republique  frangaise,  sa  vie  politique 

et  privee,  ecrite  d'apres  les  documents  originau.v  laisses  par  lui  et 
les  notes  d'Augustin  Santerre,  son  fils  aine,  2d  edition,  Meaux,  1869. 
A  superficial  work,  of  little  value,  showing  little  evidence  either  of 
"  original  documents "  or  of  "  notes  of  Augustin  Santerre." 

342 


The  Uprising  of  June  20,  1792  147 

10.  Champion,  Edme.    La  France  d'apres  les  cahiers  de  1789,  Paris,  1897. 

11.  Christophelsmeier,   Carl.     "The   First   Revolutionary   Step,"   in   Uni- 

versity Studies,  University  of  Nebraska,  January,  1909. 

12.  Clapham,  J.  H.    The  Causes  of  the  War  of  1792,  Cambridge,  1899. 

13.  Dreyfus,  Maurice,  Les  femmes  de  la  revolution  frangaise,  1789-1795, 

Paris,  1903. 

14.  Flammermont,  Jules.    Le  14  juillet,  1789.    Paris,  1892. 

15.  Fling,  F.  M.    "The  Oath  of  the  Tennis  Court,"  University  Studies, 

University  of  Nebraska,  October,  1899. 

16.  Glagau,   Hans,   Die  franzdsische  Legislative   und  der   Ursprung   der 

Revolutionskriege,  1791-1792,  Berlin,  1896. 

17.  Hatin,    Eugene,    Bibliographie  Jiistorique    et    critique    de    la    presse 

periodique  frangaise,  Paris,  1866. 

18.  Kuscinski,  Les  deputes  a  I'assemblee  legislative  de  1791,  Paris,  1900. 

19.  Lacroix,  Sigismond,  Le  departement  de  Paris  et  de  la  Seine  pendant 

la  revolution.    Paris,  1904. 

20.  Martin,  Fernand.    La  journee  des  piques.    Le  20  juin,  1792,  Clermont- 

Ferrand,  1901.  P.  Juliot,  15  Rue  de  1'eau.  This  work  has  no  scien- 
tific value  whatever. 

21.  Masson,  Frederic,  Petites  histoires,  I  serie,  Paris,  1910. 

22.  Mellie,  Ernest,  Les  sections  de  Paris  pendant  la  revolution  frangaise, 

Paris,  1898. 

23.  Robiquet,  Paul.    Le  personel  municipal  de  Paris  pendant  la  revolution. 

Paris,  1890. 

24.  Sorel,  Albert.    L'Europe  et  la  revolution  frangaise,  4  vols.,  Paris,  1889. 

25.  Stephens,  H.  Morse.    The  French  Revolution,  2  vols.,  New  York,  1886. 

26.  Stoddard,  Julia  Crewett.    "  The  Causes  of  the  Insurrection  of  the  5th 

and  6th  of  October,  1789,"  University  Studies,  University  of  Ne- 
braska, October,  1904. 

27.  Sybel,  Heinrich  von.    History  of  the  French  Revolution,  4  vols.,  Lon- 

don, 1867. 

28.  Ternaux,  Mortimer.    Histoire  de  la  terreur,  1792-1794.    5  vols.,  Paris, 

1868. 

29.  Tourneux,  Maurice.     Bibliographie  de  I'histoire  de  Paris,  pendant  la 

revolution  frangaise,  3  vols.,  Paris,  1890-1900. 

30.  Tuetey,   Alexandre,   Repertoire  general   des   sources   manuscrites   de 

I'histoire  de  Paris  pendant  la  revolution  frangaise,  g  vols.,  Paris, 
1890-1910. 

31.  Varenne,   Maton-de-la-,  Histoire  particuliere  des  evenements  qui  ont 

eu  lieu  en  France  pendant  les  mois  de  juin,  juillet,  d'aout,  et  de 
septembre,  1792,  et  qui  ont  op  ere  la  chute  du  trone  royal.  Paris, 
1806.  A  very  prejudiced  account  and  based  on  the  Recit  historique 
et  exact,  the  authorship  of  which  is  not  given. 


343 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


'•'      '(  !  1 

1  Mi  a 

35 

V 

LOAN 

FEB4 

LD  21A-50m-ll,'62 
(D3279slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


